Search: condonation of delay | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

47 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 253clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai334 Indore240 Delhi223 Chennai222 Kolkata172 Karnataka139 Ahmedabad138 Jaipur132 Bangalore116 Surat113 Lucknow108 Chandigarh99 Pune64 Raipur47 Hyderabad44 Panaji43 Nagpur42 Cuttack38 Rajkot36 Allahabad32 Patna29 Cochin26 Jabalpur22 Varanasi20 Visakhapatnam14 Guwahati14 Ranchi9 Jodhpur8 Amritsar8 Agra8 SC4 Telangana2 Rajasthan1 Dehradun1 Calcutta1 Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 80P(2)95 Section 143(3)43 Addition to Income43 Disallowance25 TDS23 Deduction22 Section 271A21 Natural Justice21 Section 80P

MICKEY SHRIVASTVA,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 122/RPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 194C(5)Section 253Section 40a

condonation of delay and submissions on additional ground will be decided later. 6. As per sub-section (5) of Section 253

SHRI OM PARSHAVNATH DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,, DURG,DURG vs. ACIT-1(1), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee company is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

Showing 1–20 of 47 · Page 1 of 3

19

Section 119(2)(b)12

ITA 23/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 23/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Om Parshvanath Developers Private Limited Nadi Road, Ganjpara, Durg (C.G)-491 001 Pan: Aamcs7665N

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Section 5. If sufficient cause is not proved nothing further has to be done; the application for condoning delay has to be dismissed on that ground alone. If sufficient cause is shown then the Court has to enquire whether in its discretion it should condone the delay. This aspect of the matter naturally introduces the consideration of all relevant facts

KAMLESH SHARMA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

ITA 70/RPR/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 70/Rpr/2026 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2020-21) Kamlesh Sharma, House No.109, Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Harihant Nagar, Sarona, Tax, Circle-1(1), Central Revenue Ring Road No.1, Raipur-492001, Cg Building, Civil Lines, Raipur-492001 Pan: Bppps4514C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None (Adjournment Petition Filed) राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 06/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am: This Appeal For Assessment Year (‘Ay’) 2020-21 Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.12.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [‘Cit(A)’], National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’), Delhi Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’).

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

Section 10Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 249(3)Section 250Section 57Section 69

delay condonation application by the Ld. CIT(A). The 2nd ground, a legal ground, challenges the validity of reopening of assessment. The 3rd ground is in respect of merit of the additions made in the assessment order. 2 Kamlesh Sharma vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1) 3. The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that the assessee filed

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 184/JAB/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Feb 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajit Korde, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

delay in filing of the cross- objections, which, by no means could be attributed to any mala-fide conduct or a lackadaisical approach on the part of the assessee respondent, therefore, the same did merit to be condoned. 8.7. On merits, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 183/JAB/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Feb 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajit Korde, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

delay in filing of the cross- objections, which, by no means could be attributed to any mala-fide conduct or a lackadaisical approach on the part of the assessee respondent, therefore, the same did merit to be condoned. 8.7. On merits, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 176/JAB/2008[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Feb 2023AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajit Korde, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

delay in filing of the cross- objections, which, by no means could be attributed to any mala-fide conduct or a lackadaisical approach on the part of the assessee respondent, therefore, the same did merit to be condoned. 8.7. On merits, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 177/JAB/2008[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Feb 2023AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajit Korde, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

delay in filing of the cross- objections, which, by no means could be attributed to any mala-fide conduct or a lackadaisical approach on the part of the assessee respondent, therefore, the same did merit to be condoned. 8.7. On merits, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), BILASPUR vs. MESERS SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, BILASPUR

ITA 30/RPR/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajit Korde, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

delay in filing of the cross- objections, which, by no means could be attributed to any mala-fide conduct or a lackadaisical approach on the part of the assessee respondent, therefore, the same did merit to be condoned. 8.7. On merits, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE -1, BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 185/JAB/2008[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Feb 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajit Korde, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

delay in filing of the cross- objections, which, by no means could be attributed to any mala-fide conduct or a lackadaisical approach on the part of the assessee respondent, therefore, the same did merit to be condoned. 8.7. On merits, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 178/JAB/2008[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Feb 2023AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajit Korde, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

delay in filing of the cross- objections, which, by no means could be attributed to any mala-fide conduct or a lackadaisical approach on the part of the assessee respondent, therefore, the same did merit to be condoned. 8.7. On merits, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE -1, BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 186/JAB/2008[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajit Korde, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

delay in filing of the cross- objections, which, by no means could be attributed to any mala-fide conduct or a lackadaisical approach on the part of the assessee respondent, therefore, the same did merit to be condoned. 8.7. On merits, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 180/JAB/2008[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Feb 2023AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajit Korde, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

delay in filing of the cross- objections, which, by no means could be attributed to any mala-fide conduct or a lackadaisical approach on the part of the assessee respondent, therefore, the same did merit to be condoned. 8.7. On merits, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 182/JAB/2008[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Feb 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajit Korde, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

delay in filing of the cross- objections, which, by no means could be attributed to any mala-fide conduct or a lackadaisical approach on the part of the assessee respondent, therefore, the same did merit to be condoned. 8.7. On merits, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, BHENDRI,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

ITA 328/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Dhody, CAFor Respondent: Shri Saty

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, KURUD,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

ITA 323/RPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Dhody, CAFor Respondent: Shri Saty

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, KODEBOD,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

ITA 331/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Dhody, CAFor Respondent: Shri Saty

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, DOMA,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

ITA 332/RPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Dhody, CAFor Respondent: Shri Saty

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, DOMA,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

ITA 333/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Dhody, CAFor Respondent: Shri Saty

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, DONAR,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

ITA 341/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Dhody, CAFor Respondent: Shri Saty

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, DONAR,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

ITA 340/RPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Dhody, CAFor Respondent: Shri Saty

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible