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.

57 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 200clear

Sorted by relevance

Patna484Chennai361Pune337Delhi325Mumbai303Bangalore244Kolkata132Karnataka123Hyderabad102Jaipur99Nagpur84Raipur57Surat54Ahmedabad41Calcutta36Chandigarh33Cochin27Lucknow23Indore21Panaji20Dehradun19Visakhapatnam18Rajkot10Agra8Amritsar8Guwahati7Cuttack5SC4Jodhpur3Jabalpur2Telangana2Allahabad2Rajasthan1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 206C114TDS47Section 234E18Section 200A12Section 143(3)12Limitation/Time-bar12Addition to Income11Section 26310Deduction

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 231/RPR/2023[2016-17 (First Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

delay occurred in filing the appeals before the CIT(Appeals). The relevant contents of the condonation application are culled out as follows: “1. The Appellant derives income from hosiery business and was required to make TDS as per provision of section 194A, 194C, 1941 of the Income-tax Act, 1961and other relevant sections. She was also required to file returns

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

Showing 1–20 of 57 · Page 1 of 3

10
Condonation of Delay9
Section 1476
Section 153A6

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 229/RPR/2023[2015-16 (First Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

delay occurred in filing the appeals before the CIT(Appeals). The relevant contents of the condonation application are culled out as follows: “1. The Appellant derives income from hosiery business and was required to make TDS as per provision of section 194A, 194C, 1941 of the Income-tax Act, 1961and other relevant sections. She was also required to file returns

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 230/RPR/2023[2015-16 (Second Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

delay occurred in filing the appeals before the CIT(Appeals). The relevant contents of the condonation application are culled out as follows: “1. The Appellant derives income from hosiery business and was required to make TDS as per provision of section 194A, 194C, 1941 of the Income-tax Act, 1961and other relevant sections. She was also required to file returns

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 228/RPR/2023[2013-14 (Fourth Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

delay occurred in filing the appeals before the CIT(Appeals). The relevant contents of the condonation application are culled out as follows: “1. The Appellant derives income from hosiery business and was required to make TDS as per provision of section 194A, 194C, 1941 of the Income-tax Act, 1961and other relevant sections. She was also required to file returns

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 227/RPR/2023[2013-14 (Third Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

delay occurred in filing the appeals before the CIT(Appeals). The relevant contents of the condonation application are culled out as follows: “1. The Appellant derives income from hosiery business and was required to make TDS as per provision of section 194A, 194C, 1941 of the Income-tax Act, 1961and other relevant sections. She was also required to file returns

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 226/RPR/2023[2013-14 (Second Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

delay occurred in filing the appeals before the CIT(Appeals). The relevant contents of the condonation application are culled out as follows: “1. The Appellant derives income from hosiery business and was required to make TDS as per provision of section 194A, 194C, 1941 of the Income-tax Act, 1961and other relevant sections. She was also required to file returns

SMT. YOGITA DEVI SAHU, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 182/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.182 & 183/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14 Smt. Yogita Devi Sahu W/O. Late Sri Tikaram Sahu, C/O. Sri Sujit Kumar Sahu Vindhya Vasini Nagar, Nayak Bandha, Abhanpur Dist. Raipur-493 661 (C.G.) Pan: Cdtps1353N ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Petition)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 5

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 regarding the condonation of delay in respect of case of land acquisition has observed and held on the aspect of delay that although the delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause, the 4 Smt. Yogita Devi Sahu Vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Raipur ITA Nos. 182 & 183/RPR/2025 merits of the case could

SMT. YOGITA DEVI SAHU, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 183/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.182 & 183/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14 Smt. Yogita Devi Sahu W/O. Late Sri Tikaram Sahu, C/O. Sri Sujit Kumar Sahu Vindhya Vasini Nagar, Nayak Bandha, Abhanpur Dist. Raipur-493 661 (C.G.) Pan: Cdtps1353N ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Petition)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 5

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 regarding the condonation of delay in respect of case of land acquisition has observed and held on the aspect of delay that although the delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause, the 4 Smt. Yogita Devi Sahu Vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Raipur ITA Nos. 182 & 183/RPR/2025 merits of the case could

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, DANTEWADA,DANTEWADA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 123/RPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 206C

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, DANTEWADA,DANTEWADA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 122/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 206C

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, DANTEWADA,DANTEWADA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 121/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 206C

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, BIJAPUR,BIJAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 245/RPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 206C

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, BEMETARA,BEMETARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 11/RPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 206C

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, DANTEWADA,DANTEWADA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 124/RPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 206C

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, BEMETARA,BEMETARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 13/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 206C

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, BEMETARA,BEMETARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 10/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 206C

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, DANTEWADA,DANTEWADA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 126/RPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 206C

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, BEMETARA,BEMETARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 14/RPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 206C

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, DANTEWADA,DANTEWADA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 125/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 206C

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, BEMETARA,BEMETARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 12/RPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 206C

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come