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.

197 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 271clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai591Delhi463Chennai315Kolkata302Ahmedabad297Jaipur251Pune197Bangalore196Surat154Hyderabad139Karnataka126Indore104Chandigarh97Cochin78Visakhapatnam66Lucknow57Nagpur55Rajkot53Cuttack48Calcutta43Patna34Amritsar32Agra29Guwahati27Raipur25Ranchi24Panaji17Allahabad15Jabalpur14SC12Dehradun7Jodhpur6Varanasi3Telangana2Punjab & Haryana2Andhra Pradesh1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)125Section 14794Penalty73Section 14865Section 142(1)65Addition to Income63Section 25051Section 271(1)(b)50Section 144

PRASANNA SADASHIV SHETE,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2761/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13 Prasanna Sadashiv Shete Dcit, Circle 10, Pune 56/8, D-Ii, Midc Shete Industries, Vs. Chinchwad, Pune – 411019 Pan: Adbps4462Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas Bora Department By : Shri Arvind Desai, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 27-03-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-05-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 249(3)

Section 249(3) which states 3 "The Commissioner (Appeals) may admit an appeal after the expiration of the said period if he is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period.” 4.2.2 For condonation of delay u/s 249(3) of the Act, the assessee has to satisfy the Commissioner (Appeals) by explaining the sufficient

Showing 1–20 of 197 · Page 1 of 10

...
42
Section 153C30
Condonation of Delay26
Limitation/Time-bar25

ROHINI MARUTI DESHMUKH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), PUNE

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

ITA 1839/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Sarang Gudhate, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi, Addl.CIT
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 54B

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 2 ITA.Nos.1837-1839/PUN./2025 (Amol Vasant Deshmukh & Ors.) 1961 (“Act”) which are arising out of penalty orders passed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, evenly dated 18/05/2018 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. 2. Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 1918 days in each

TULSABAI VASANT DESHMUKH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), PUNE

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

ITA 1838/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Sarang Gudhate, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi, Addl.CIT
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 54B

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 2 ITA.Nos.1837-1839/PUN./2025 (Amol Vasant Deshmukh & Ors.) 1961 (“Act”) which are arising out of penalty orders passed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, evenly dated 18/05/2018 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. 2. Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 1918 days in each

AMOL VASANT DESHMUKH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), PUNE

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

ITA 1837/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Sarang Gudhate, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi, Addl.CIT
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 54B

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 2 ITA.Nos.1837-1839/PUN./2025 (Amol Vasant Deshmukh & Ors.) 1961 (“Act”) which are arising out of penalty orders passed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, evenly dated 18/05/2018 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. 2. Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 1918 days in each

MR. CHITTARANJAN TRIMBAK GAIKWAD,PUNE vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 759/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri B.C. MalakarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

condone the said delay and proceed to decide the appeal. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual. He filed his return of income for AY 2010-11 on 16.10.2010 2 ITA No.759/PUN/2024, AY 2010-11 declaring total income of Rs.7,12,450/-. Subsequently, he revised his return by filing revised return

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(3),, PUNE vs. RAHUL NAYAN BHALERAO,, PUNE

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2237/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(3),, PUNE vs. RAHUL NAYAN BHALERAO,, PUNE

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2235/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

THOUWFEEQ FISH MEAL & OIL COMPANY PVT.LTD,,RATNAGIRI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RATNAGIRI CIRCLE ,, RATNAGIRI

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2323/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

BHATABHAI SHANKAR PATEL,,NANDURBAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4,, DHULE

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1913/PUN/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

UTTAM BHAGWANRAO PATIL,,LATUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1),, PUNE

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1718/PUN/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

NAWANDER COMPANY,,LATUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, LATUR CIRCLE,, LATUR

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1683/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

VYANKATESH CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE ,, MALEGAON

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2494/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

LALCHAND CHHOTALAL SHAH,,KARAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SATARA CIRCLE , , SATARA

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2155/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

JEETU BHAGCHANAD KHEMANI,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3),, NASHIK

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2114/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(3),, PUNE vs. RAHUL NAYAN BHALERAO,, PUNE

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2236/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(3),, PUNE vs. ABHAY NAYAN BHALERAO,, PUNE

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2527/PUN/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

RAKESH LALCHNAND SHAH,,KARAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SATARA CIRCLE , , SATARA

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2154/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

DR. M. S. HIREMATH,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -5,, PUNE

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1894/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

M/S. HOTEL DAMINI,,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1),, KUDAL

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1887/PUN/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(3),, PUNE vs. RAHUL NAYAN BHALERAO,, PUNE

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2234/PUN/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

delay of 24 and 10 days, respectively, is condoned. 5. On perusal of records and after hearing the learned Authorized Representatives, we find that in this bunch of appeals, the Assessing Officer while completing assessment proceedings had initiated penalty proceedings for concealment under section 271