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.

61 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 274clear

Sorted by relevance

Kolkata159Mumbai152Delhi117Karnataka101Chennai82Bangalore75Jaipur72Ahmedabad66Pune61Surat61Cochin47Hyderabad47Visakhapatnam39Indore24Chandigarh23Cuttack17Lucknow16Ranchi12Amritsar11Agra11Rajkot11Calcutta10Raipur10Guwahati6Patna5Nagpur5Allahabad5Jabalpur4Varanasi3Telangana2Dehradun2Jodhpur2Andhra Pradesh1Rajasthan1SC1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(b)179Section 142(1)109Section 143(3)77Penalty59Section 153A49Section 271(1)(c)48Section 27440Addition to Income37Section 254(1)

SHRI PARESH K. SORATHIYA,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(2)(3),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 342/SRT/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.342/Srt/2018 (Ay 2009-10) (Hearing In Physical Court) Shri Paresh Sorathiya Income Tax Officer 195, Ambica Nagar No.2, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Vs Opp. Arogya Kendra, Gate, Surat-395001 Katargam Road, Surat Pan : Axbps 9579 C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

delay of 920 days in filing the appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for decision on merits. Now, we will advert to discuss the merit of the appeal. 7. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual, filed his return of income for Ay 2009-10, declaring income of Rs. 1,58,000/-. The case

RAJESHBHAI POPATBHAI GABANI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(3), SURT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Showing 1–20 of 61 · Page 1 of 4

32
Section 13224
Search & Seizure24
Limitation/Time-bar14
ITA 51/SRT/2020[2009-10]Status: Disposed
ITAT Surat
11 Jul 2022
AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

delay of 876 days in filing all the appeals is condoned. 11. Now adverting to the facts of case on merit. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is individual, filed his return of income for the year under consideration that is assessment year (AY) 2009-10, declaring income of Rs.2,57,673/- on 15.10.2009. Subsequently, case of assessee

RAJESHBHAI POPATBHAI GABANI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(3), SURT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 53/SRT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

delay of 876 days in filing all the appeals is condoned. 11. Now adverting to the facts of case on merit. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is individual, filed his return of income for the year under consideration that is assessment year (AY) 2009-10, declaring income of Rs.2,57,673/- on 15.10.2009. Subsequently, case of assessee

RAJESHBHAI POPATBHAI GABANI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(3), SURT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 52/SRT/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

delay of 876 days in filing all the appeals is condoned. 11. Now adverting to the facts of case on merit. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is individual, filed his return of income for the year under consideration that is assessment year (AY) 2009-10, declaring income of Rs.2,57,673/- on 15.10.2009. Subsequently, case of assessee

SHRI SUDIN MAHADEV SANGODKAR,GOA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAMAN WARD, DAMAN

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

ITA 207/SRT/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Shri Sudin Mahadev Sangodkar, I.T.O., House No. 46B, 1/5 Next To Fab Ward-Daman Vs. India, Alta Mapusa, Bardez, Daman. North Goa, Goa-403507. Ph.9423530599 Email: Smsangodcar@Gmail.Com Pan No. Ajjps 0830 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 156Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

condonation of delay in filing appeal before ld. CIT(A) and other evidence to show that the assessee was not served with the notice under section 274

BASANTILAL TARBA,RAJASTHAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-3(1)(2), SURAT

In the result, the ground of appeal raised in this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 512/SRT/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.512/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Hybrid Hearing) Bansntilal Tarba Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(2), बनाम/ 429/1023, Sundarnagar, Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Vs. Ahimsa Circle, Bhilwara, Surat-395 001 Rajasthan- 311 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Afipt 1037 P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, Ca राज" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri Ravinder Sindhu, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing 23/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025

Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act’) dated 24.01.2024 by the National Face Less Appeal Centre (NFAC),Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short, ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2010-11, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) u/s. 144 r.w.s

RAJESH C DALAL-HUF,SURAT vs. ADDL/JT/DEPUTY/ASST CIT/NATIONAL E- ASSESSMENT CENTER DELHI , DELHI

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

ITA 249/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Rajesh C. Dalal-Huf, A.C.I.T., P-260, Old Gidc Estate, National E-Assessment Vs. Katargam, Surat-395004. Centre, Delhi. Pan: Aalhr 4363 J Appellant Respondednt

Section 24Section 254(1)Section 270A(1)Section 274

274 r.w.s. 270A of the Act dated 27/01/2021 fixing the date of compliance on or before 09/02/2021. In response to show cause notice, the assessee filed reply on 09/02/2021. In the reply the assessee besides justifying his stand as taken before assessing officer, submitted that they have filed application for seeking immunity from imposing the penalty as per section 270AA

NA vs. ARI MALESAR BEHDIN ANJUMAN,NAVSARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 336/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.336/Srt/2023 (Ay 2013-14) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navsari Malesar Behdin Income Tax Officer, (Exemption) Ward, Room Anjuman, Agary Street, Vs No.105, 1St Floor, Anavil Malesar, Business Centre, Aayakar Navsari-396445 Bhavan, Adajan Hazira Road, Pan No. Aaatn 6124 C Adajan, Surat-395007 ""थ" /Respondent अपीलाथ"/Appellant

Section 11Section 156Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

condoned the delay in filing 4 Navsari Malesar Behdin Anjuman appeal before him. The ld Sr DR for the revenue prayed for dismissal of appeal. 5. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have gone through the order of lower authorities carefully. We find that the quantum assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was completed

VASUNDHARA VRIX VANWADI JAL SINCHN VIKAS SAHAKAI MANDLI LTD.,NA vs. ARIVS.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI

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

ITA 280/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Vasundhara Vrix Vanwadi A.C.I.T., Jalsinchnvikas Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Navsari Circle, Navsari, Vs. Room No. 302, 3Rd Floor, “Vrindavan Campus” At:Lachhakadi, Post-Gangpur, Tal. Vansada, Dist.- Income Tax Office, Navsari, Gujarat-396050. Charpool, Awabaug, Pan No. Aaajv 0058 M Navsari, Gujarat-396445. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 250(6)Section 254(1)Section 274Section 80P(2)(a)

Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short, the ld. CIT(A)) dated 30/03/2022 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal

SANJAYBHAI DAMJIBHAI GOLAKIYA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the appellant is allowed

ITA 951/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.951/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Sanjaybhai Damjibhai Golakiya, Vs. The Assessment Unit, D-74, Vithalnagar Society, Hirabaug, Income-Tax Department, Varachha Road, Surat - 395006 Jurisdictional Ao: The Ito, Ward – 3(3)(1), Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Alopg2048R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025

Section 250Section 253(1)Section 253(3)Section 271(1)(c)

Section 253(3) of the Act. The assessee has filed an affidavit giving reasons for delay in filing of appeal before the Tribunal. In the affidavit, it has been stated that the appellant filed appeal u/s 253(1) of the Act on 09.09.2024, vide ITA No.951/SRT/2024, against the order dated 15.02.2024, which was uploaded on the Income-tax e-filing

RAMESHKUMAR LAXMANLAL SIROYA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-3(2)(6), SURAT

In the result, assessee’s appeal ITA No

ITA 48/SRT/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita Nos.48 & 49/Srt/2022 (Ay 2009-10) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Rameshkumar Laxmanlal Income Tax Officer, Ward- Siroya, 7/C Supari Baugh 3(2)(6), Anavil Business Vs Mension, Nirmala Niwas, 34 Center, Adajan Hazira Dr. Ambedkar Road, Parel, Road, Adajan, Mumbai-400012 Surat-395 007 Pan : Afaps 0153 D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

Section 144Section 148Section 151Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

274 of Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law and required to be deleted. 3.On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to consider that levy of penalty of Rs.509681 under section 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961 by Ld. AO is bad in law and required to be deleted

RAMESHKUMAR LAXMANLAL SIROYA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-3(2)(6), SURAT

In the result, assessee’s appeal ITA No

ITA 49/SRT/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita Nos.48 & 49/Srt/2022 (Ay 2009-10) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Rameshkumar Laxmanlal Income Tax Officer, Ward- Siroya, 7/C Supari Baugh 3(2)(6), Anavil Business Vs Mension, Nirmala Niwas, 34 Center, Adajan Hazira Dr. Ambedkar Road, Parel, Road, Adajan, Mumbai-400012 Surat-395 007 Pan : Afaps 0153 D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

Section 144Section 148Section 151Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

274 of Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law and required to be deleted. 3.On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to consider that levy of penalty of Rs.509681 under section 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961 by Ld. AO is bad in law and required to be deleted

SHRI HARISHKUMAR NAGINBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD - 2(3)(6), SURAT

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

ITA 14/SRT/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing In Virtual Court) Mohmed Ismail Vakhawala, Vs The Ito, International C/O. Chirag Tambedia & Co., 9, Pruthvi Taxation, Bharuch. Nagar, 1St Floor, Station Road, Bharuch, 392001, Gujarat. [Pan : Abdpv 2440 D] Assessee Respondednt

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 90

delay condoned application. 6) The assessee craves for leave to add or amend any of the grounds of appeal.” 3. At the outset, Learned Counsel for the assessee begins by pointing out that during the assessment stage, the Assessing Officer has levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act stating that assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income

KANTILAL DAYALBHAI RAMBHAI ,SURAT vs. ITO(INT. TAX), SURAT

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

ITA 928/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.928/Srt/2024

Section 250Section 253(3)Section 45

condone the delay of 5 days and admit the appeal for hearing. 6. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not filed her return of income for AY.2015-16. The Assessing Officer (in short, 'AO') had recorded the reason for re-opening the case of the assessee after getting prior approval from the competent authority

JANANI EXPORTS,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, all seven appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 403/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing. 3. Since, the issue involved in all these appeals, are common and identical, therefore these appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts as well as the grounds narrated in ITA No.399/SRT/2023 for AY.2013-14 have been

JANANI EXPORTS,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, all seven appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 405/SRT/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing. 3. Since, the issue involved in all these appeals, are common and identical, therefore these appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts as well as the grounds narrated in ITA No.399/SRT/2023 for AY.2013-14 have been

JANANI EXPORTS,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, all seven appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 400/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing. 3. Since, the issue involved in all these appeals, are common and identical, therefore these appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts as well as the grounds narrated in ITA No.399/SRT/2023 for AY.2013-14 have been

JANANI EXPORTS,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, all seven appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 402/SRT/2023[2016-17 (Quarter-1)-(24Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Aug 2023

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing. 3. Since, the issue involved in all these appeals, are common and identical, therefore these appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts as well as the grounds narrated in ITA No.399/SRT/2023 for AY.2013-14 have been

JANANI EXPORTS,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, all seven appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 404/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing. 3. Since, the issue involved in all these appeals, are common and identical, therefore these appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts as well as the grounds narrated in ITA No.399/SRT/2023 for AY.2013-14 have been

JANANI EXPORTS,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, all seven appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 399/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing. 3. Since, the issue involved in all these appeals, are common and identical, therefore these appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts as well as the grounds narrated in ITA No.399/SRT/2023 for AY.2013-14 have been