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.

14 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 46Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi120Kolkata99Mumbai84Chennai77Amritsar62Ahmedabad59Hyderabad57Jaipur42Pune30Lucknow26Patna24Bangalore18Indore17Chandigarh16Surat15Rajkot14Visakhapatnam8Cuttack7Allahabad6Jodhpur5Guwahati5Agra4Calcutta4Cochin3Raipur2Jabalpur2Varanasi2Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 5612Section 206C(7)12Section 206C(6)12Section 6810Addition to Income10Section 1449Section 50C8Section 2504Section 143(3)

JITESHBHAI RAMNIKLAL NAGADA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 2(6), JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 46/RJT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.39/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) Kantaben Ramniklal Nagda Vs. Ito, Wd- 2(6), Jamnagar Flat No. 603, K D Tower, Oswal Aayakar Bhavan, Nr. Subhash Bridge, Colony, Jamnagar Rajkot Highway, Jamnagar-361004 Jamnagar - 361001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agtpn7366D (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 50CSection 56Section 68

section 50C is not applicable. 5. Hon'ble CIT (Appeals) erred in law as well as fact by confirming by making addition of Rs. 3,06,284/- u/s 68 for agricultural income disclosed by appellant for want of supporting documents. 6. Hon'ble CIT (Appeals) erred in law as well as fact by confirming addition

4
TDS4
Penalty2
Limitation/Time-bar2

KANTABEN RAMNIKLAL NAGDA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 2(6), JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 39/RJT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.39/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) Kantaben Ramniklal Nagda Vs. Ito, Wd- 2(6), Jamnagar Flat No. 603, K D Tower, Oswal Aayakar Bhavan, Nr. Subhash Bridge, Colony, Jamnagar Rajkot Highway, Jamnagar-361004 Jamnagar - 361001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agtpn7366D (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 50CSection 56Section 68

section 50C is not applicable. 5. Hon'ble CIT (Appeals) erred in law as well as fact by confirming by making addition of Rs. 3,06,284/- u/s 68 for agricultural income disclosed by appellant for want of supporting documents. 6. Hon'ble CIT (Appeals) erred in law as well as fact by confirming addition

HEENA MUKESH VARNAVA,,JAMNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1),, JAMNAGAR

In the result the assessee appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 497/RJT/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot18 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Ms. Madhumita Royheena Mukesh Varanava Vs. The Ito Dhunvav, P.O Jambuda, Ward-2(1), Jamnagar Jamnagar [Pan No. Aet Pv0 164 P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: None (Written Submission)For Respondent: Shri Suhaj Mistry, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

section 143(3) r.w.s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to “the Act”) for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of call. However, a written notes of submission has been filed on behalf of the assessee. The Ld. DR is present before us. We, therefore

SHRI BHARAT SINGH,DHRANGADHRA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD- 3, SURENDRANAGAR

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

ITA 153/RJT/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 153/Rjt/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2015-2016 Shri Bharat Singh, I.T.O., Kalyanpur (Kondh), Vs. Ward-3, Kondh, Surendranagar. Dhrangadra-363310. Pan: Catps9626P

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.D Gupta, CIT. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 44A

condoning the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee. Hence, we admit the appeal preferred by the assessee and proceed to adjudicate the same on merit. 4. The only effective issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition made by the AO for Rs. 4,44,784/- only. 5. The assessee

SHRI ASHOKBHAI DEVJIBHAI PATEL,MITANA, DIST. MORBI vs. THE ITO WARD 2 (1) (1) RAJKOT, RAJKOT

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 243/RJT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot06 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 243/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Ashokbhai Devjibhai Patel Vs. Income Tax Officer, Wd – 2(1)(1), C/O. M/S. Jay Ganesh Petroleum, Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Mitana-Morbi – 363611 Rajkot-1 Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot – 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acnpp7584K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Brijesh Parekh, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 06/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Brijesh Parekh, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 44A

condoned the delay in filing appeal by 47 days. 6. Brief facts of the case that the assessee filed his return of income showing total income of Rs. 17,41,590/- was filed on 16.10.2012, The return of income was processed u/s. 143(1) of the I.T. Act. The assessee is engaged in the business of transportation & insurance agent

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. JAYDEEP T BADRAKIA, MORBI

In the result all the four appeal of Revenue and assessee are allowed for statical purpose

ITA 21/RJT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 22/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2021-22) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Pallavi, Ld. CIT. DR
Section 144Section 250Section 68

condoning the delay in filing of appeal by the assessee. 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in considering the additional evidence produced by the assessee during the appellate proceedings and in deciding the assessee's appeal on the basis of the same, without recording proper reasons

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI NILESHBHAI SURESHBHAI UNTAVADIYA, MORBI

In the result all the four appeal of Revenue and assessee are allowed for statical purpose

ITA 22/RJT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 22/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2021-22) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Pallavi, Ld. CIT. DR
Section 144Section 250Section 68

condoning the delay in filing of appeal by the assessee. 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in considering the additional evidence produced by the assessee during the appellate proceedings and in deciding the assessee's appeal on the basis of the same, without recording proper reasons

JAYDEEP THAKARSHIBHAI BADRAKIA,MORBI vs. ACIT, CC-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result all the four appeal of Revenue and assessee are allowed for statical purpose

ITA 453/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 22/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2021-22) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Pallavi, Ld. CIT. DR
Section 144Section 250Section 68

condoning the delay in filing of appeal by the assessee. 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in considering the additional evidence produced by the assessee during the appellate proceedings and in deciding the assessee's appeal on the basis of the same, without recording proper reasons

SHRI PRAKASH J. BAGDAI,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO-WD-16(1)(1), MUMBAI, PRESENT JURISDICTION WITH ITO-WARD-1 (2)(4), RAJKOT

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

ITA 138/RJT/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 138/Rjt/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2007-2008 Prakash J. Bagdai, I.T.O., C/O M.N. Manvar & Co., Vs. Ward-16(1)(1), Chartered Accountant, Mumbai. 504-Star Plaza, (Present Jurisdiction With Phulchhab Chowk, I.T.O, Rajkot. Ward-1(2)(4), Rajkot.)

For Appellant: Shri M.N. Manvar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

46A is satisfied and dismissed the appeal. 3. At the outset, we note that there was a delay in filing the appeal by the assessee for 73 days. However, it was noticed that the delay has occurred by the assessee in filing the appeal during the Covid-19 period. Therefore, we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the issue

SHRI SUBIR YUDHISTHIR DAS,BELAPUR, THANE (MAHARASTRA) vs. THE CIT(A)-13, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 19/RJT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Kushiram Jadhvani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 246ASection 271

delay is hereby being condoned. 4. On merits, the brief facts of the case are that assessee had not filed return of income u/s 139 (1) of the Act and therefore, notice under section 148 was issued by the Department on 31-03-2019. In response, the assessee filed return of income 01-06-2019, disclosing “Nil” income. During

SHRI BABULAL MIYARAM GADRI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, TDS-3,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the matter is being restored to the file of the Ld

ITA 53/RJT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

46A which is reproduced as under:- ……. 4.6 As the appellant has not complied with the requirements of Sec.206C(1A) therefore he cannot escape from the responsibility entrusted upon him of collecting tax at source. The appellant on the other hand has contested this issue and has submitted certain case laws wherein it was held that submission of form

SHRI BABULAL MIYARAM GADRI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, TDS-3,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the matter is being restored to the file of the Ld

ITA 51/RJT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

46A which is reproduced as under:- ……. 4.6 As the appellant has not complied with the requirements of Sec.206C(1A) therefore he cannot escape from the responsibility entrusted upon him of collecting tax at source. The appellant on the other hand has contested this issue and has submitted certain case laws wherein it was held that submission of form

SHRI BABULAL MIYARAM GADRI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, TDS-3,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the matter is being restored to the file of the Ld

ITA 52/RJT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

46A which is reproduced as under:- ……. 4.6 As the appellant has not complied with the requirements of Sec.206C(1A) therefore he cannot escape from the responsibility entrusted upon him of collecting tax at source. The appellant on the other hand has contested this issue and has submitted certain case laws wherein it was held that submission of form

SHRI BABULAL MIYARAM GADRI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, TDS-3,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the matter is being restored to the file of the Ld

ITA 54/RJT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

46A which is reproduced as under:- ……. 4.6 As the appellant has not complied with the requirements of Sec.206C(1A) therefore he cannot escape from the responsibility entrusted upon him of collecting tax at source. The appellant on the other hand has contested this issue and has submitted certain case laws wherein it was held that submission of form