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.

18 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 132(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi471Chennai418Mumbai367Kolkata224Hyderabad192Bangalore172Jaipur127Karnataka112Ahmedabad100Chandigarh95Amritsar79Surat74Pune69Visakhapatnam55Rajkot36Calcutta36Indore30Nagpur29Guwahati22Patna20Raipur18Lucknow18Panaji14Cuttack13Telangana11Dehradun10Ranchi9SC9Jodhpur8Orissa6Kerala4Cochin4Rajasthan1Punjab & Haryana1Agra1Andhra Pradesh1Varanasi1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 271A23Section 15420Section 25019Section 153A14Section 270A13Section 26313Section 119(2)(b)12Section 2719Addition to Income

DOLPHIN PROMOTERS AND BUILDERS,RAIPUR vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 58/RPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 58/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal & Vimal KumarFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 68Section 801B(10)

condoned the delay involved in present case. 10. At the threshold of the hearing, Ld. AR pressed following additional grounds: Additional Ground No. 1 dated 04.04.2024 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, assessment made u/s 144 by Addl. CIT is invalid as he was not having valid jurisdiction over the assessee firm for making assessment

8
Limitation/Time-bar4
Condonation of Delay4
Exemption3

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(1), RAIPUR vs. MESERSS CHHATTISGARH STATEELECTRICITY BOARD, RAIPUR

ITA 31/RPR/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Sept 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.31/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board (Through Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Limited) Dangania Raipur Pan : Aabcc7876Q ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri Praveen Khandelwal & PraveenFor Respondent: Dr. Simran Bhullar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

section 147 is valid and the return filed pursuant thereto is also valid. As no change have been made to the said return of income, the return has become final. Hence, the income of the assessee has to be computed on the basis of said return of income. Therefore, we direct the AO to recompute the final income accordingly

RAJENDRA KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA, DURG,DURG vs. ITO, NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 744/RPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.744/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-21 Rajendra Kumar Shrivastava, Mig-42, Padmanabhpur, Durg (C.G.)-491 001 Pan: Alops3921M

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 154Section 154(2)(B)Section 154(8)Section 155Section 186Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

delayed payment of such contribution as deemed income in the hands of the assessee. It was contended by the assessee that the assessee had paid the employee’s 4 Rajendra Kumar Shrivastava Vs. ITO, NFAC contribution of Rs.7,69,000/- before the due date as defined u/s. 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’), hence

SUNIL SPONGE PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 748/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.748/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sunil Sponge Private Limited Plot No.96-97, Phase-Ii, Industrial Area, Siltara, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan: Aahcs7999A

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 153D

delay of 3 days is condoned and the appeal is heard on merits. 3 Sunil Sponge Private Limited Vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Raipur 5. In this case, the assessee has filed both legal grounds as well as grounds on merits. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that he would assail the legal ground first and if the said

NEELAM CHANDRAKAR, RAJNANDGAON,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 444/RPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)

delay caused in no way can be attributed to any deliberate conduct of the assessee. appeals respectively are condoned. I take guidance from the judicial pronouncements in the cases of viz. (i) Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Civil Appeal Nos……………../2025 [Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 26310-26311/2024, dated 31.01.2025; (ii) Jagdish Prasad Singhania Vs. Additional

LEELADHAR CHANDRAKAR, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 442/RPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)

delay caused in no way can be attributed to any deliberate conduct of the assessee. appeals respectively are condoned. I take guidance from the judicial pronouncements in the cases of viz. (i) Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Civil Appeal Nos……………../2025 [Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 26310-26311/2024, dated 31.01.2025; (ii) Jagdish Prasad Singhania Vs. Additional

LEELADHAR CHANDRAKAR, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 (3), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 443/RPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)

delay caused in no way can be attributed to any deliberate conduct of the assessee. appeals respectively are condoned. I take guidance from the judicial pronouncements in the cases of viz. (i) Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Civil Appeal Nos……………../2025 [Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 26310-26311/2024, dated 31.01.2025; (ii) Jagdish Prasad Singhania Vs. Additional

SARTHAK ISPAT PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 513/RPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A No. 14 & Ita Nos. 513, 514, 515, 516 & 517/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250

condonation of delay. 6. It is noticed that there are the common, interconnected and identical issues involved in the captioned appeals arising from the orders of Ld. AO passed on an even date, having common findings. The orders passed by Ld. AO u/s 153A are assailed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), which are decided by the First

SARTHAK ISPAT PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 516/RPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A No. 14 & Ita Nos. 513, 514, 515, 516 & 517/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250

condonation of delay. 6. It is noticed that there are the common, interconnected and identical issues involved in the captioned appeals arising from the orders of Ld. AO passed on an even date, having common findings. The orders passed by Ld. AO u/s 153A are assailed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), which are decided by the First

SARTHAK ISPAT PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 514/RPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A No. 14 & Ita Nos. 513, 514, 515, 516 & 517/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250

condonation of delay. 6. It is noticed that there are the common, interconnected and identical issues involved in the captioned appeals arising from the orders of Ld. AO passed on an even date, having common findings. The orders passed by Ld. AO u/s 153A are assailed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), which are decided by the First

SARTHAK ISPAT PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 517/RPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A No. 14 & Ita Nos. 513, 514, 515, 516 & 517/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250

condonation of delay. 6. It is noticed that there are the common, interconnected and identical issues involved in the captioned appeals arising from the orders of Ld. AO passed on an even date, having common findings. The orders passed by Ld. AO u/s 153A are assailed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), which are decided by the First

SARTHAK ISPAT PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 515/RPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A No. 14 & Ita Nos. 513, 514, 515, 516 & 517/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250

condonation of delay. 6. It is noticed that there are the common, interconnected and identical issues involved in the captioned appeals arising from the orders of Ld. AO passed on an even date, having common findings. The orders passed by Ld. AO u/s 153A are assailed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), which are decided by the First

SAKSHAM,BILASPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, all the captioned appeals i

ITA 102/RPR/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.100 & 101/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Shrishti Institute Of Medical Science & Research Centre, Pandey Complex Near Petrol Pump, Niharika, Korba-495677 (C.G.). Pan : Aacas5201L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.102/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 Saksham Mig-1 Ameri Sagar Dwip, Sagar Dwip Ameri, Bilashpur-495001(C.G.). Pan : Aaeas6801Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal

For Appellant: Shri Y.K. Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 115VSection 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 132Section 132ASection 143Section 147Section 153ASection 154Section 158B

condonation of the delay in filing its audit report in “Form No. 10BB” was declined by him, as under:- 4 Shrishti Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre & Ors. vs. CIT(E) ITA No. 100, 101& 102/RPR/2020 5 Shrishti Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre & Ors. vs. CIT(E) ITA No. 100, 101& 102/RPR/2020 4. We have heard

SHRISHTI INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE AND RESEARCH CENTRE,KORBA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, all the captioned appeals i

ITA 100/RPR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.100 & 101/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Shrishti Institute Of Medical Science & Research Centre, Pandey Complex Near Petrol Pump, Niharika, Korba-495677 (C.G.). Pan : Aacas5201L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.102/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 Saksham Mig-1 Ameri Sagar Dwip, Sagar Dwip Ameri, Bilashpur-495001(C.G.). Pan : Aaeas6801Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal

For Appellant: Shri Y.K. Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 115VSection 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 132Section 132ASection 143Section 147Section 153ASection 154Section 158B

condonation of the delay in filing its audit report in “Form No. 10BB” was declined by him, as under:- 4 Shrishti Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre & Ors. vs. CIT(E) ITA No. 100, 101& 102/RPR/2020 5 Shrishti Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre & Ors. vs. CIT(E) ITA No. 100, 101& 102/RPR/2020 4. We have heard

SHRISHTI INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE AND RESEARCH CENTRE,KORBA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, all the captioned appeals i

ITA 101/RPR/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.100 & 101/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Shrishti Institute Of Medical Science & Research Centre, Pandey Complex Near Petrol Pump, Niharika, Korba-495677 (C.G.). Pan : Aacas5201L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.102/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 Saksham Mig-1 Ameri Sagar Dwip, Sagar Dwip Ameri, Bilashpur-495001(C.G.). Pan : Aaeas6801Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal

For Appellant: Shri Y.K. Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 115VSection 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 132Section 132ASection 143Section 147Section 153ASection 154Section 158B

condonation of the delay in filing its audit report in “Form No. 10BB” was declined by him, as under:- 4 Shrishti Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre & Ors. vs. CIT(E) ITA No. 100, 101& 102/RPR/2020 5 Shrishti Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre & Ors. vs. CIT(E) ITA No. 100, 101& 102/RPR/2020 4. We have heard

ANIL NACHRANI,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 47/RPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 47/Rpr/2022) (Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 263Section 263(1)

132 of Bench 29.04.2022 LPB-3 Gulab Badgujar (2019) 179 ITD Hon'ble ITAT, 1 -7 of 2. HU vs. ITO 807 Pune Pune 'B' Bench LPB-3 3. PCIT vs. Silver Line (2016) 383 ITR Hon’ble High 1 -7 of 455 (Del) Court of Delhi LPB 1 4. PCIT-08 vs. Shri Jai ITA 519/2015

TRIDEV ISPAT PVT. LTD., KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE (2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 426/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Subash Agarwal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 10A(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 246ASection 250Section 251Section 270ASection 271ASection 274Section 40A(3)

4. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay of 40 & 41 days in instituting these twin appeals, we after placing reliance on ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250 (Bom) and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC), in the larger interest

TRIDEV ISPAT PVT. LTD., KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 427/RPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Subash Agarwal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 10A(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 246ASection 250Section 251Section 270ASection 271ASection 274Section 40A(3)

4. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay of 40 & 41 days in instituting these twin appeals, we after placing reliance on ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250 (Bom) and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC), in the larger interest