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.

9 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 272A(2)(e)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai41Visakhapatnam29Surat25Ahmedabad24Pune23Mumbai22Lucknow20Indore18Cuttack16Cochin11Kolkata11Hyderabad10Delhi10Bangalore10Rajkot9Jaipur7Amritsar7Chandigarh6Patna4Agra3Jabalpur3Raipur3SC2Allahabad1Nagpur1Guwahati1Ranchi1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 14712Section 14810Addition to Income8Section 2506Section 69A6Section 143(3)6Penalty6Section 1445Section 234A

CHINTAN DWARKADAS CHOTAI,JUNAGADH vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR 1(1), RKT, RAJKOT

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

ITA 636/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

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

For Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 80G

E R Per, Dinesh Mohan Sinha, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2019-20, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short “the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC”], dated 08.08.2025, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing

4
Section 272A(1)(d)4
Unexplained Money4
Cash Deposit4

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

e Premiu Received Premium m (2) (1) 0183 UG 28/08/2 31/08/201 First 750000 99900 99900 99900 0 5313 PROTEC 010 0 Premium 80 TION PLUS II SIZE 1 Total 99900 99900 99900 0 4.2. Thus it is evident on record, the Life Insurance Premium is not Rs. 9,99,000/- but it is Rs. 99,900/- only. As per Section

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

e Premiu Received Premium m (2) (1) 0183 UG 28/08/2 31/08/201 First 750000 99900 99900 99900 0 5313 PROTEC 010 0 Premium 80 TION PLUS II SIZE 1 Total 99900 99900 99900 0 4.2. Thus it is evident on record, the Life Insurance Premium is not Rs. 9,99,000/- but it is Rs. 99,900/- only. As per Section

SHREE MARU KANSARA SONI GNATI,ANJAR vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD-1 RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 789/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 789/Rjt/2025 धििाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: (2017-18) Shree Maru Kansara Soni Gnati बनाम Income Tax Officer (Exemption), /Vs. C/O Rajesh K Soni, Shashtri Road, Ward- 1, Rajkot, Anjar, Kutch-360 001(Gujarat) It Office, New Aayakar Bhavan,Vatiaka, Rajkot-360 001 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aarts 1920 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 274

E R Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year 2017-18, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), dated 29/01/2025, which in turn arises

POOJA OMPRAKASH NAWANI,ADIPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2, GANDHIDHAM, GANDHIDHAM

ITA 876/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.876/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Pooja Omprakash Nawani Vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Flat-5 Nirav Appartment, Plot-358 Ito Ward – 2, Ward-2B, Gandhidham - 370205 Adipur 370205 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acfpn4546H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri K. L. Solanki, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24 / 04 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 08 / 07 /2025

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri K. L. Solanki, Ld. SR. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 272(1)(d)Section 272A(1)(d)Section 274

E R PER DINESH MOHAN SINHA JM; Captioned appeal filed by assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2018-19 penalty, is directed against order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), vide order dated 17/10/2024, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer dated 16/03/2023 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144B of the Income

CHIMANLAL BHUTALAL SAGAR,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

ITA 126/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 126/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (208-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Chimanlal Bhutalal Sagar Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income C/.O Ca Himansu Gandhi, 10Th Floor, D Tax (International Taxation)-1, Wing, Trade World Building, Kamala Room N.312, Ito, Amruta Mills Compaund, Lower Parle – 400013 Building, Nr. Girnar Cinema, M. G. Road, Gujarat – 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Fdmps3665D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Himansu Gandhi, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/06/2025

For Appellant: Shri Himansu Gandhi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 250Section 271ASection 69

section 271AAC(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 10. Appellant craves leave to add further grounds or to amend or hearing. alter the existing grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing. 11. Whether there is any delay in filing of appeal (if yes please attach application seeking condonation of delay) 3. At the outset, that the appeal

DIVYA DARSHAN ENTERPRISE,JUNAGADH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

ITA 150/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 150/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Divya Darshan Enterprise Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Block No. 7/8, Meera Nagar, Opp. Circle – 1(1), Rajkot Shashikunj, Gandhipar, B/H. Sardarbaug, Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Junagadh – 362001 Ring Road, Rajkot – 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aahfd5111A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 06/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/06/2025

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 263Section 69A

section 144 of the Act and assessing the total income at Rs.81,46,440/- by making addition of Rs.11,00,000/- u/s.69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act as unexplained money on the alleged ground that the appellant failed to explain source of cash deposit during demonetization period alongwith necessary documentary evidences. 8 As stated above, assessing officer has issued statutory

DILIPSINNH GAMBHIRSNH JADEJA,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1)(1), RAJKOT

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

ITA 303/RJT/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018
Section 144Section 144oSection 234ASection 250Section 271ASection 69A

272A(1)(d) of the\nAct.\"\n3. At the outset, this appeal is time barred by 15 days by the assessee. The\nLd. A.R. has filed an Affidavit and requested for condoning delay the same\nare reproduced as under: -\n“1. Your honour may kindly appreciate that hon. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi has\npassed order on 23.02.2024, which

PRAGNESH KANTARYA,RAJKOT, GUJARAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SURENDRANAGAR, SURENDRANAGAR, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 485/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 485/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Pragnesh Kantariya Vs. Income Tax Officer, Wd –1, (Prop. Of Vision Industies) Surendranagar, Income Tax Office, B2-1101, Shilpan Onyx, Gangotri Park Opp. Mela Medan, Main Road, University Road, Surendranagar-363001 Rajkot – 360005 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bbspk0467P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri K. L. Solanki, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K. L. Solanki, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 234ASection 234CSection 250Section 271ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 69A

E R PER DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal), dated 08.12.2023, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer