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.

154 results for “condonation of delay”+ Set Off of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai476Chennai467Kolkata291Delhi244Hyderabad210Ahmedabad206Jaipur164Pune154Chandigarh147Bangalore126Raipur75Lucknow74Indore60Surat55Rajkot49Cuttack48Nagpur46Cochin43Visakhapatnam41Patna31SC24Jodhpur24Amritsar22Guwahati15Panaji10Agra8Allahabad8Varanasi7Dehradun4Ranchi3Jabalpur3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Addition to Income67Section 80P65Section 143(3)61Section 25053Deduction46Section 12A38Section 80P(2)(a)35Section 14733Section 263

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)

losses from assessment year 2015-16 to 2018-19, copies of which are filed in the paper book at pages 1 to 160. It is also an admitted fact that due to non payment of dues, Bank of Maharashtra has recalled the cash credit and the term loan of the assessee and has also threatened to take coercive action

Showing 1–20 of 154 · Page 1 of 8

...
32
Section 143(1)32
Condonation of Delay31
Disallowance28

VIRENDRA SINGH SAINI,HARYANA vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE, BENGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1483/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Pune19 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1483/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.S.Rajpurohit
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

condone the delay of 798 and proceed for adjudication of appeal on merits. 6. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant filed the Return of Income for the A.Y. 2019-20 on 27.09.2019 disclosing total income of Rs.19,48,890/-. Return was processed u/s.143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) vide intimation

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BODHI TOWER vs. KUMAR BUILDERS PROJECT PUNE PRIVATE LIMITED, BUND GARDEN

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 199/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 80ISection 80P

condoned. In the present case before us, the assessee stands on a much better footing. 14 5. Therefore, on the facts and circumstances of the case, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to verify the fact that there was only a minor delay of 12 minutes

SAI SAKSHI AUTOMOTIVE LTD,PUNE vs. ITO WARD-6(1), PUNE

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

ITA 2725/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri B.S. RajpurohitFor Respondent: Shri Mallikarjun Utture, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 68

Loss Account Rs.72,51,796/- iii) Unexplained Cash credits u/s 68 Rs.6,68,20,111/- 4. Since the assessee filed the appeal with a delay of 149 days, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee by observing as under: “5.1 I have gone through the Assessment Order and grounds of appeal filed by the appellant

KOLHAPUR MAHILA SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED,KOLHAPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOLHAPUR

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

ITA 2778/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 249(2)Section 36(1)(viia)

Loss Account. 2.4 The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming additions of ₹ 2,80,000/- on account of Nominal Membership Fee and ₹ 34,300/-on account of Entrance Fee. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal.” 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had a reasonable/sufficient cause

SHAILA OMPRAKASH JETHALE,PUNE vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 1364/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1364 & 1365/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra AgiwalFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale
Section 133(6)Section 138Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

losses incurred by the family there is a case beyond doubt that there is a sufficient cause for condonation of delay within the meaning of section 249(3) for CIT(A) to condone the delay. 17. The series of decisions from the Hon'ble Supreme Court, High Court and Hon'ble Pune Bench have condoned the delay by taking

SHAILA OMPRAKASH JETHALE,PUNE vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 1365/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1364 & 1365/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra AgiwalFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale
Section 133(6)Section 138Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

losses incurred by the family there is a case beyond doubt that there is a sufficient cause for condonation of delay within the meaning of section 249(3) for CIT(A) to condone the delay. 17. The series of decisions from the Hon'ble Supreme Court, High Court and Hon'ble Pune Bench have condoned the delay by taking

AUTOCOMP CORPORATION PANSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,PUNE vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE

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

ITA 2646/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 May 2025AY 2013-14

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

Loss Account and no other evidence was submitted by the assessee, the Assessing Officer concluded that there was wrong adoption of net profit while computing the total income for assessment year 2013-14. The Assessing Officer accordingly determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.10,14,77,723/-. 3. Since there was a delay of 54 days in filing

AUTOCOMP CORPORATION PANSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,PUNE vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

ITA 2647/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 May 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

Loss Account and no other evidence was submitted by the assessee, the Assessing Officer concluded that there was wrong adoption of net profit while computing the total income for assessment year 2013-14. The Assessing Officer accordingly determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.10,14,77,723/-. 3. Since there was a delay of 54 days in filing

GAURAV RAJA PATHAK,PUNE vs. DCIT-CIRCLE1(1), PUNE

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

ITA 1505/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkende
Section 112Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 249Section 250

set-off losses of Rs. 35,95,270 (being the current year's capital loss u/s 112 against the long-term gains from the sale of residential House Property) thereby increasing the returned income by Rs. 35,95,270/-. 3 2. Non-Condonation of the Delay

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

loss at Rs.877.10 crores. Subsequently the said order was set aside by the Ld. CIT u/s 263 of the Act on 02.11.2006 and de novo assessment was directed. Pursuant to the said 263 order, we find the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 27.12.2007 assessing the total income of the assessee

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

loss at Rs.877.10 crores. Subsequently the said order was set aside by the Ld. CIT u/s 263 of the Act on 02.11.2006 and de novo assessment was directed. Pursuant to the said 263 order, we find the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 27.12.2007 assessing the total income of the assessee

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

loss at Rs.877.10 crores. Subsequently the said order was set aside by the Ld. CIT u/s 263 of the Act on 02.11.2006 and de novo assessment was directed. Pursuant to the said 263 order, we find the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 27.12.2007 assessing the total income of the assessee

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

loss at Rs.877.10 crores. Subsequently the said order was set aside by the Ld. CIT u/s 263 of the Act on 02.11.2006 and de novo assessment was directed. Pursuant to the said 263 order, we find the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 27.12.2007 assessing the total income of the assessee

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

loss at Rs.877.10 crores. Subsequently the said order was set aside by the Ld. CIT u/s 263 of the Act on 02.11.2006 and de novo assessment was directed. Pursuant to the said 263 order, we find the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 27.12.2007 assessing the total income of the assessee

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

loss at Rs.877.10 crores. Subsequently the said order was set aside by the Ld. CIT u/s 263 of the Act on 02.11.2006 and de novo assessment was directed. Pursuant to the said 263 order, we find the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 27.12.2007 assessing the total income of the assessee

GENERAL INDUSTRIAL CONTROS LTD.,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE 8, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the order of the CIT(A) is set aside, and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 38/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

set off of any loss or allowance for unabsorbed depreciation deemed so under section 72A, if such loss or depreciation is attributable to any of the deductions referred to in clause (i); and ITA No.38/PUN/2025 [A] (iv) by claiming the depreciation, if any, under any provision of section 32, except clause (iia) of sub-section (1) of the said section

PRATIMA CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,PUNE vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

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

ITA 1383/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Bheek Singh RajpurohitFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 12ASection 80G

loss and injury. On the other hand, no prejudice would be cause to the respondent if the delay is condoned and the matter is heard on merits. Hon'ble ITAT has the inherent power to condone the delay in filing appeal in the interest of natural justice. 6. In view of the above, the appellant humbly prays that this

PRATIMA CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,PUNE vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

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

ITA 1384/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Bheek Singh RajpurohitFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 12ASection 80G

loss and injury. On the other hand, no prejudice would be cause to the respondent if the delay is condoned and the matter is heard on merits. Hon'ble ITAT has the inherent power to condone the delay in filing appeal in the interest of natural justice. 6. In view of the above, the appellant humbly prays that this

BHUJBAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 2(2), PUNE, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee stand DISMISSED on above terms

ITA 756/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 0756/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Bhujbal Construction Company Gat No. 12/29, Someshwar Wadi, Pashan, Haveli, Baner Rd., Pune. Pan: Aaffb7317L . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)Pune-1. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr Umesh Phade [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 249(2)Section 250Section 40

Loss Account [in short ‘P&L’] and credited eight identified persons were disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act and the assessment vide order dt. 22/03/2016 was accordingly framed u/s 143(3) of the Act. 3.2 Aggrieved thereby assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) on 15/01/2022, which came to be dismissed in-limine as barred by limitation