BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

312 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 12A(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai338Pune312Ahmedabad225Delhi223Kolkata160Jaipur159Chennai154Bangalore142Hyderabad103Surat55Indore53Lucknow51Chandigarh47Cuttack39Calcutta37Rajkot36Nagpur35Visakhapatnam33Amritsar31Cochin29Karnataka24Raipur15Jodhpur15Patna13Panaji10Allahabad7Guwahati6Agra6Jabalpur5Ranchi3Dehradun3Himachal Pradesh2Varanasi2SC2Andhra Pradesh1Telangana1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 12A308Section 12A(1)(ac)194Section 80G96Exemption96Section 80G(5)78Section 1164Condonation of Delay38Section 143(1)25Limitation/Time-bar

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 763/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

1. The Board have considered whether the requirement under section 12A(b) of filing audit report 'along with the return of income' is mandatory so as to disentitle the trust from claiming exemption under sections 11 and 12 in case of omission to furnish such report in the prescribed form along with the return. 2. Normally, it should be possible

Showing 1–20 of 312 · Page 1 of 16

...
23
Charitable Trust17
Section 1013
Section 271E13

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 761/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

1. The Board have considered whether the requirement under section 12A(b) of filing audit report 'along with the return of income' is mandatory so as to disentitle the trust from claiming exemption under sections 11 and 12 in case of omission to furnish such report in the prescribed form along with the return. 2. Normally, it should be possible

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 765/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

1. The Board have considered whether the requirement under section 12A(b) of filing audit report 'along with the return of income' is mandatory so as to disentitle the trust from claiming exemption under sections 11 and 12 in case of omission to furnish such report in the prescribed form along with the return. 2. Normally, it should be possible

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 762/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

1. The Board have considered whether the requirement under section 12A(b) of filing audit report 'along with the return of income' is mandatory so as to disentitle the trust from claiming exemption under sections 11 and 12 in case of omission to furnish such report in the prescribed form along with the return. 2. Normally, it should be possible

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 766/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

1. The Board have considered whether the requirement under section 12A(b) of filing audit report 'along with the return of income' is mandatory so as to disentitle the trust from claiming exemption under sections 11 and 12 in case of omission to furnish such report in the prescribed form along with the return. 2. Normally, it should be possible

STARS FORUM,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION , PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 493/PUN/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2025

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

1) of section 12A of the IT Act filed on 28.06.2024 and denying the application for approval in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the IT Act filed on 28.06.2024. ITA No.1219/PUN/2025 : 2. There is a delay of 129 days in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with

STARS FORUM,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1219/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2025

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

1) of section 12A of the IT Act filed on 28.06.2024 and denying the application for approval in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the IT Act filed on 28.06.2024. ITA No.1219/PUN/2025 : 2. There is a delay of 129 days in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with

SOLO RESEARCH FOUNDATION,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 217/PUN/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.216 & 217/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year:- Solo Research Foundation, V The Commissioner Of Office No.50/51, B12 S Income Tax(Exemption), Shardaram Park, Sasoon Road, Pune. Pune – 411001. Pan: Aaxcs3760K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Rahul Kaul – Ar Revenue By Shri Amit Bobde – Dr Date Of Hearing 25/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration U/S.12Ar.W.S 12Ab & 80G(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred To As „The Act‟) Both Dated 28.11.2024 Respectively. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being

Section 10Section 11Section 12Section 12A

condone such delay and such application shall be deemed to have been filed within time;] 5. Since the Assessee was already having registration u/s.12AA of the Act, as per Amended Section 12A(1

SOLO RESEARCH FOUNDATION,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 216/PUN/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.216 & 217/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year:- Solo Research Foundation, V The Commissioner Of Office No.50/51, B12 S Income Tax(Exemption), Shardaram Park, Sasoon Road, Pune. Pune – 411001. Pan: Aaxcs3760K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Rahul Kaul – Ar Revenue By Shri Amit Bobde – Dr Date Of Hearing 25/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration U/S.12Ar.W.S 12Ab & 80G(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred To As „The Act‟) Both Dated 28.11.2024 Respectively. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being

Section 10Section 11Section 12Section 12A

condone such delay and such application shall be deemed to have been filed within time;] 5. Since the Assessee was already having registration u/s.12AA of the Act, as per Amended Section 12A(1

CHAITNYA PRATISHTAN,ICHALKARANJI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals in ITA No

ITA 152/PUN/2025[NOT APPLICABLE]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 May 2025

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Bhuvanesh KankaniFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

condone the delay. However, the contention of the assessee is not acceptable considering the following: 3.1 The CBDT vide Circular No.6/2023 dated 24/05/2023, extended the date of filing of Form No.10A in case of an application under clause (i) of the first proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 or under sub-clause (i) of clause (ac) of sub-section

CHAITNYA PRATISHTAN,ICHALKARANJI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals in ITA No

ITA 151/PUN/2025[NOT APPLICABLE]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 May 2025

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Bhuvanesh KankaniFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

condone the delay. However, the contention of the assessee is not acceptable considering the following: 3.1 The CBDT vide Circular No.6/2023 dated 24/05/2023, extended the date of filing of Form No.10A in case of an application under clause (i) of the first proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 or under sub-clause (i) of clause (ac) of sub-section

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 767/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 11Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 250

condonation of delay in filing the return and Audit Report on Form 10B, assessee has to approach the competent authority along with justification for the delay”. 4. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that Audit Report on Form No.10B was filed on 16.02.2022 and at the time of processing

DISTRICT PROBATION & AFTER CARE ASSOCIATION SATARA,SATARA vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD1(1), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2607/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

condonation of delay in filing of Form 10B was also furnished on 21.09.2023 and the main reason for delay was on account of covid-19 pandemic outbreak restrictions. However, even after the uploading of Audit Report in Form 10B on 30.03.2021, in the return processed u/s.143(1)(a) of the Act on 30.11.2021 the benefit of application of income

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1155/MUM/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Section 2(15) of the Act. Thus, the decision of the learned CIT on this issue is reversed. Having stated so, we are of the view that the issue of condonation of delay for grant of registration with retrospective effect, requires fresh adjudication in view of material placed before us, hence, in the interests of justice, we set aside

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1154/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Section 2(15) of the Act. Thus, the decision of the learned CIT on this issue is reversed. Having stated so, we are of the view that the issue of condonation of delay for grant of registration with retrospective effect, requires fresh adjudication in view of material placed before us, hence, in the interests of justice, we set aside

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 544/PUN/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Section 2(15) of the Act. Thus, the decision of the learned CIT on this issue is reversed. Having stated so, we are of the view that the issue of condonation of delay for grant of registration with retrospective effect, requires fresh adjudication in view of material placed before us, hence, in the interests of justice, we set aside

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1153/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Section 2(15) of the Act. Thus, the decision of the learned CIT on this issue is reversed. Having stated so, we are of the view that the issue of condonation of delay for grant of registration with retrospective effect, requires fresh adjudication in view of material placed before us, hence, in the interests of justice, we set aside

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 543/PUN/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Section 2(15) of the Act. Thus, the decision of the learned CIT on this issue is reversed. Having stated so, we are of the view that the issue of condonation of delay for grant of registration with retrospective effect, requires fresh adjudication in view of material placed before us, hence, in the interests of justice, we set aside

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 545/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Section 2(15) of the Act. Thus, the decision of the learned CIT on this issue is reversed. Having stated so, we are of the view that the issue of condonation of delay for grant of registration with retrospective effect, requires fresh adjudication in view of material placed before us, hence, in the interests of justice, we set aside

SHREE CHAITANYA-RAM FOUNDATION,BAVDHAN PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2619/PUN/2025[2025-2026]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2026AY 2025-2026

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gadekar, CIT
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) empowers the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to condone delay if they find that there was reasonable