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.

17 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 149clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai251Mumbai184Kolkata180Karnataka113Delhi110Bangalore99Ahmedabad86Hyderabad83Chandigarh72Nagpur65Raipur49Jaipur46Pune45Calcutta37Amritsar37Visakhapatnam36Surat35Lucknow21Rajkot17Cochin16Cuttack14Guwahati9Indore8SC3Patna3Jabalpur2Dehradun2Andhra Pradesh2Allahabad2Telangana2Varanasi2Orissa1Agra1Rajasthan1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 25032Section 143(3)18Limitation/Time-bar14Condonation of Delay11Section 1488Section 2637Section 1476Addition to Income6Section 148A

MAYURBHAI HIRABHAI SINDHAV ( MALDHARI),RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1)(2), RAJKOT

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

ITA 570/RJT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot16 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI (Accountant Member), SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250

149) and held that... "The position in law is well settled that an assessee should be granted due relief where it is due without standing on technicalities and the revenue must bear the established legal position in mind while dealing with applications seeking condonation of delay. It is necessary that liberal approach is adopted in such a matter

MAYURBHAI HIRABHAI SINDHAV (MALDHARI),RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1)(2), RAJKOT

5
Section 271(1)(c)4
Section 69A3
Unexplained Investment3

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

ITA 571/RJT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot16 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI (Accountant Member), SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250

149) and held that... "The position in law is well settled that an assessee should be granted due relief where it is due without standing on technicalities and the revenue must bear the established legal position in mind while dealing with applications seeking condonation of delay. It is necessary that liberal approach is adopted in such a matter

JYOTIBEN RAMESHCHANDRA SHAH,PORBANDAR vs. ITO, W-2(3), PORBANDAR, INCOME TAX OFFICE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 184/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13
Section 144Section 147

Section\n5 is proved, the application must not be thrown out or any delay cannot be\nrefused to be condoned.\nIn Smt. Milavi Devi v. Dina Nath [(1982) 3 SCR 3661, it was held that the\nappellant had sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the period of\nlimitation. This Court under Article 136 can reassess the ground

JIVANBHAI DE vs. HIBHAI SARLA,THANGADH, DIST. SURENDRANAGARVS.THE ITO WARD 2, SURENDRANAGAR, SURENDRANAGAR

ITA 521/RJT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Ms. Devina Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR &
Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

condone the delay in both appeals and admit these appeals for hearing. 7. In both these appeals, the assessee has raised the grounds pertaining to technical issue, being notice issued under section 148 of the Act, is time barred. When these cases were called for hearing, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue under consideration, in both appeals

JIVANBHAI DE vs. HIBHAI SARLA,THANGADH, DIST. SURENDRANAGARVS.THE ITO WARD-2, SURENDRANAGAR, SURENDRANAGAR

ITA 519/RJT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Ms. Devina Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR &
Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

condone the delay in both appeals and admit these appeals for hearing. 7. In both these appeals, the assessee has raised the grounds pertaining to technical issue, being notice issued under section 148 of the Act, is time barred. When these cases were called for hearing, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue under consideration, in both appeals

VIPUL ARJANBHAI PARMAR,MANGROL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, JUNAGADH

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 217/RJT/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपील सं. /Ita No.217/Rjt/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 बनाम/ Vipul Arjanbhai Parmar Income Tax Officer Vs C/O. Sarda & Sarda (Ca), Sakar, Ward – 1, Junagadh 1St Floor, Dr. Radha-Krishnan Road, Opp. Rajkumar College, Rajkot, Gujarat - 360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ditpp9286B (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250

149) and held as follows: "The position in law is well settled that an assessee should be granted due relief where it is due without standing on technicalities and the revenue must bear the established legal position in mind while dealing with applications seeking condonation of delay. It is necessary that liberal approach is adopted in such a matter

RAMESHBHAI KHIMJIBHAI TANK,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)(3), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 202/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.202/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Sr-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250

149) and held that... "The position in law is well settled that an assessee should be granted due relief where it is due without standing on technicalities and the revenue must bear the established legal position in mind while dealing with applications seeking condonation of delay. It is necessary that liberal approach is adopted in such a matter

SHREE TITHVA SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LIMITED,TITHVA, WANKANER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, MORBI

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

ITA 19/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Apr 2025AY 2020-21
Section 250

149) and held that...\n\"The position in law is well settled that an assessee should be granted due\nrelief where it is due without standing on technicalities and the revenue must bear the\nestablished legal position in mind while dealing with applications seeking\nc o n d o n a t i o n of delay. It is necessary

NILESH ASHANAND THACKER,BHUJ vs. ITO WARD 4, GANDHIDHAM (BHUJ)

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed

ITA 377/RJT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.377/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Nilesh Ashanand Thacker, बनाम Income-Tax Officer, Ward-4, / Near-Laxmi Vekari Mahakali Gandhidham (Bhuj-2)-370 201 Vs. Shopping Mall, Jublee Circle, Bhuj, Kutch-300 001(Gujarat) "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adhpt 8610R (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

149) wherein it was held as follows: "The position in law is well settled that an assessee should be granted due relief where it is due without standing on technicalities and the revenue must bear the established legal position in mind while dealing with applications seeking condonation of delay. It is necessary that liberal approach is adopted in such

SHRI BECHARBHAI DHARAMSHIBHAI VASOYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO WARD 1 (1) (1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

ITA 125/RJT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 May 2025AY 2011-12
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

149)\nand held that...\n\"The position in law is well settled that an assessee should be granted due\nrelief where it is due without standing on technicalities and the revenue must\nbear the established legal position in mind while dealing with applications\nseeking condonation of delay. It is necessary that liberal approach is adopted\nin such a matter

SWAHRAY CO OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,RAJKOT vs. ITO, WARD-3(1)(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 86/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.86/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 154

149) and held that... "The position in law is well settled that an assessee should be granted due relief where it is due without standing on technicalities and the revenue must bear the established legal position in mind while dealing with applications seeking condonation of delay. It is necessary that liberal approach is adopted in such a matter

J K SECURITES & CONSULTANCY,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(1), RAJKOT

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

ITA 119/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.119/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2016-17) J.K. Securities & Consultancy बनाम Income Tax Officer, Ward- 301, Sagar Arcade, Gondal 1(2)(1), Rajkot, New Aaykar /Vs. Road, Rajkot-360 002 Bhawan, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadfj 6816 G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Samar Bhuptani, Ld.A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 250

149) and held that... "The position in law is well settled that an assessee should be granted due relief where it is due without standing on technicalities and the ITA No. 119/RJT/2025 A.Y.16-17 J.K.Securities & Consultancy revenue must bear the established legal position in mind while dealing with applications seeking condonation of delay. It is necessary that liberal approach is adopted

SHRI CHINTAN KANJIBHAI KATARIYA,ANJAR-KUTCH vs. THE ITO WARD-1, , GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 54/RJT/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Further, the Assessing Officer also observed that the assessee had made substantial cash payments to labourers towards site expenses. However, on verification of bills, vouchers etc. the Assessing Officer observed that certain payments were made in cash below Rs. 20,000/- and some of the payments were supported only by self-made vouchers

SMT. RANI HARERAM SAHANI,KOVAYA, RAJULA, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE ACIT, WARD-2 (4), BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 9/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

condone the delay of 13 days in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) on the Principles of Natural Justice. 4.1. On merits, the assessment was reopened on the basis of information received from DDIT, Investigation Unit-2, Rajkot that the assessee has paid an amount of Rs. 9,99,000/- to Shri Jinabhai Vagh on 10.03.2011 for Life Insurance

SMT. RANI HARERAM SAHANI,KOVAYA, RAJULA, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE ITO, WARD-3 (1) (4), RAJULA, DIST. AMRELI, RAJULA, DIST. AMRELI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 148/RJT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

condone the delay of 13 days in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) on the Principles of Natural Justice. 4.1. On merits, the assessment was reopened on the basis of information received from DDIT, Investigation Unit-2, Rajkot that the assessee has paid an amount of Rs. 9,99,000/- to Shri Jinabhai Vagh on 10.03.2011 for Life Insurance

SHREEJI CERAMIC INDUSTRIES,MORBI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 266/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. A.L.Saini, Am & Diesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.266/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Shreeji Ceramic Industries, The Principal Commissioner Of Vs. 8/A National Highway, Lalpar Income Tax – 1, Morbi - 363642 Rajkot "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aalfs8846B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit (Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 17/07/2025 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Principle Commissioner Of Income Tax, Rajkot – 1 [In Short, “The Ld. Pcit”], Dated 30.03.2021 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows.

For Appellant: Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263Section 263o

149). As mentioned in the judgement, liberal approach is Assessment Year.2015-16 Shreeji Ceramic adopted by the Hon’ble High Court in such a matter so as to ensure that substantive rights are not defeated on the basis of technicalities or limitation. The relevant para of judgement is reproduced in the application under para 20. As mentioned in para

VINOD LALJIBHAI VADSOLA,TIMBADI vs. ITO, WARD-1, MORBI

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

ITA 939/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 939/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) Vinod Laljibhai Vadsola Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vill. Timbadi, Tal: Morbi- Morbi-363 641 Vs. 363 641 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Alnpv 3995 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Rajendra Singhal, A.R. राज"व क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 05/05/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07/05/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Order (Ay) 2017-18, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (In Short “Cit(A)”, Dated 09.08.2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act” Dated 25.05.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- 2. “The Grounds Of Appeal Mentioned Hereunder Are Without Prejudice To One Another. 1. The Ld.Cit(Appeals) Has Erred In Law & On The Facts In Holding Assessment Proceedings As Valid Through: A. The Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Has Been Issued By The Ito, Ward-1, Morbi In Violation Of The Provisions Of Sec. 151A Of Act & The Ita No. 939/Rjt/2024 A.Y.17-18 Vinod L. Vadsola

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Singhal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 151ASection 69A

149 of the Act, as there were no any books of account/document or evidence in his possession, which might had revealed escapement of income. e. The order u/s 148A(d) of the Act was passed without approval of the competent specified authority as per sec. 151(ii) of the Act. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred