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.

3,500 results for “TDS”+ Condonation of Delayclear

Sorted by relevance

Patna615Chennai388Mumbai315Delhi280Pune237Raipur209Nagpur187Hyderabad172Kolkata156Chandigarh140Bangalore132Jaipur124Ahmedabad88Cuttack68Cochin68Visakhapatnam50Lucknow47Surat44Indore37Rajkot32Dehradun23Amritsar20Panaji16Jodhpur11Guwahati10Ranchi7Jabalpur7Agra7Allahabad5Varanasi5

Key Topics

Section 6867TDS63Section 26357Addition to Income56Limitation/Time-bar38Section 153A35Section 234E31Section 4030Section 25026Condonation of Delay26

NAUSHAD ALI ABDUL HAQ SHAIK,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 42(2)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 7339/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Akshay JainFor Respondent: Mr. Swapnil Choudhari, Sr. DR
Section 245

condoned the delay in the interconnected penalty proceedings arising from the same set of facts. The assessee has proceedings arising from the same set of facts. The assessee has proceedings arising from the same set of facts. The assessee has filed an affidavit before us, the relevant portions of which are filed an affidavit before us, the relevant portions

NAUSHAD ALI ABDUL HAQ SHAIKH,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 42(2)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 7338/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Showing 1–20 of 3,500 · Page 1 of 175

...
Section 143(1)21
Section 142(1)21
For Appellant: Mr. Akshay JainFor Respondent: Mr. Swapnil Choudhari, Sr. DR
Section 245

condoned the delay in the interconnected penalty proceedings arising from the same set of facts. The assessee has proceedings arising from the same set of facts. The assessee has proceedings arising from the same set of facts. The assessee has filed an affidavit before us, the relevant portions of which are filed an affidavit before us, the relevant portions

DEMI REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes on the above terms

ITA 156/HYD/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakhsmi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 40a

condone the delay of 1784 days in filing the appeal and thus admit the appeal for hearing. Accordingly, ground nos.2 and 3 are allowed. 7.1. Case is now taken up for adjudication on merits. 8. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is a firm engaged in the business of Real Estate and that on 17.10.2007 a search

MATSYODARI SHIKSHAN SANSTHAS ANKUSHRAO TOPE COLLEGE, JALNA,JALNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, AURANGABAD

ITA 878/PUN/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jan 2026AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri C N ChobeFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl.CIT
Section 200ASection 234E

TDS returns for period prior to 1-6-2015 were invalid. He accordingly submitted that the Tribunal should condone the delay

MATSYODARI SHIKSHAN SANSTHAS ANKUSHRAO TOPE JUNIOR COLLEGE, JALNA,JALNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, AURANGABAD

ITA 879/PUN/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jan 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri C N ChobeFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl.CIT
Section 200ASection 234E

TDS returns for period prior to 1-6-2015 were invalid. He accordingly submitted that the Tribunal should condone the delay

MATSYODARI SHIKSHAN SANSTHAS ANKUSHRAO TOPE COLLEGE, JALNA,JALNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, AURANGABAD

ITA 877/PUN/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jan 2026AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri C N ChobeFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl.CIT
Section 200ASection 234E

TDS returns for period prior to 1-6-2015 were invalid. He accordingly submitted that the Tribunal should condone the delay

MATSYODARI SHIKSHAN SANSTHAS ANKUSHRAO TOPE JUNIOR COLLEGE, JALNA,JALNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, AURANGABAD

ITA 880/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri C N ChobeFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl.CIT
Section 200ASection 234E

TDS returns for period prior to 1-6-2015 were invalid. He accordingly submitted that the Tribunal should condone the delay

JAN SEVA MANDAL ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD -1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

ITA 3445/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2023-24 Jan Seva Mandal, Central Processing Centre Income Vinayalaya, Mahakali Caves Tax Deparment, Bengaluru, Vs. Road, Andheri (East), Income Tax Officer Exemption Mumbai-400093. Ward 1(4), Mumbai. 6Th Floor, Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaatj 4868 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan PatelFor Respondent: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

TDS refund of Rs. 1,05,613/- against the Appellant: against the Appellant: 1. A sum of Rs. 17,61,379/ A sum of Rs. 17,61,379/- under section 11(1 )(a) of the under section 11(1 )(a) of the Act Act Act being being being amount amount amount accumulated accumulated accumulated

APAASSO MALI,PUNE vs. ITO 11(1), SWARGATE

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

ITA 1110/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Suhas KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri A D Kulkarni
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 147rSection 148Section 249Section 249(2)

condonation of delay. 3.3 On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) erred in Conducting proceedings ex-parte, not providing adequate and meaningful opportunities to present the case, relying on unverified information without giving an opportunity to rebut. Ground No. 4: 7 ITA No.1110/PUN/2025, AY 2018-19 4.1 On the facts and in the circumstances

LALITA DEVI SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-7(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1410/JPR/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1410/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Lalita Devi Sharma Murlidhar Sharma Dhani Vs. Harsaura, Baskhoh, Jaipur Baskho, Jaipur अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: HCPPS 0547 Q प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hear

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

TDS, as it was her first year of audit u/s 44AB. The assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) which was delayed. However, the assessee filed the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal. The Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine holding - There exists no sufficient or good reason for condoning

SUNILKUMAR RAJENDRA RAI,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 286/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y.Marathe, Sr.Dr
Section 200Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

TDS Ward, Nagpur ITA no.286/Nag./2023 The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:– 2. “ Grounds of Appeal Tax Effect 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in condoning the delay

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

ITA 2363/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 200ASection 234E

condone the delay. The Court considering an\napplication under section 5 of the Limitation Act may also look\ninto the prima facie merits of an appeal. A liberal approach may\n5\nChate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd.and\nShree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan\nbe adopted when some plausible cause for delay is shown.\nHon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State

TAMILNADU GRAMA BANK,ULUNDURPET,- vs. DCIT,CPC, GAZIABAD

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1034/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2023AY 2013-14
Section 200ASection 234E

Condonation of Delay in filing appeals and requests Hon'ble ITAT to consider the appeal and set aside the order of Id. CIT(A). GROUND NO 2: Insertion of clause (c) to section 200a (1) of the IT Act specifically w.e.f,1.06.2015 The Id. CIT(A) has erred and not considered that TDS

TAMILNADU GRAMA BANK,KURINJIPADI,- vs. DCIT,CPC,TDS, GAZIABAD

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1033/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2023AY 2015-16
Section 200ASection 234E

Condonation of Delay in filing appeals and requests Hon'ble ITAT to consider the appeal and set aside the order of Id. CIT(A). GROUND NO 2: Insertion of clause (c) to section 200a (1) of the IT Act specifically w.e.f,1.06.2015 The Id. CIT(A) has erred and not considered that TDS

TAMILNADU GRAMA BANK, KURUJIPADI ,- vs. DCIT,CPC, GAZIABAD

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1029/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2023AY 2013-14
Section 200ASection 234E

Condonation of Delay in filing appeals and requests Hon'ble ITAT to consider the appeal and set aside the order of Id. CIT(A). GROUND NO 2: Insertion of clause (c) to section 200a (1) of the IT Act specifically w.e.f,1.06.2015 The Id. CIT(A) has erred and not considered that TDS

-TAMILNADU GRAMA BANK, KURINJIPADI,SALEM vs. DCIT,CPC, GAZIABAD

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1031/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2023AY 2015-16
Section 200ASection 234E

Condonation of Delay in filing appeals and requests Hon'ble ITAT to consider the appeal and set aside the order of Id. CIT(A). GROUND NO 2: Insertion of clause (c) to section 200a (1) of the IT Act specifically w.e.f,1.06.2015 The Id. CIT(A) has erred and not considered that TDS

TAMILNADU GRAMA BANK, ULUNDURPET,- vs. DCIT,CPC,TDS, GAZIABAD

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1040/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2023AY 2015-16
Section 200ASection 234E

Condonation of Delay in filing appeals and requests Hon'ble ITAT to consider the appeal and set aside the order of Id. CIT(A). GROUND NO 2: Insertion of clause (c) to section 200a (1) of the IT Act specifically w.e.f,1.06.2015 The Id. CIT(A) has erred and not considered that TDS

TAMILNADU GRAMA BANK,ULUNDURPET,- vs. DCIT,CPC,TDS, GAZIABAD

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1038/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2023AY 2015-16
Section 200ASection 234E

Condonation of Delay in filing appeals and requests Hon'ble ITAT to consider the appeal and set aside the order of Id. CIT(A). GROUND NO 2: Insertion of clause (c) to section 200a (1) of the IT Act specifically w.e.f,1.06.2015 The Id. CIT(A) has erred and not considered that TDS

TAMILNADU GRAMA BANK, KURINJIPADI,- vs. DCIT,CPC, GAZIABAD

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1030/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2023AY 2013-14
Section 200ASection 234E

Condonation of Delay in filing appeals and requests Hon'ble ITAT to consider the appeal and set aside the order of Id. CIT(A). GROUND NO 2: Insertion of clause (c) to section 200a (1) of the IT Act specifically w.e.f,1.06.2015 The Id. CIT(A) has erred and not considered that TDS

TAMILNADU GRAMA BANK,ULUNDURPET,- vs. DCIT,CPC,TDS, GAZIABAD

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1037/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2023AY 2015-16
Section 200ASection 234E

Condonation of Delay in filing appeals and requests Hon'ble ITAT to consider the appeal and set aside the order of Id. CIT(A). GROUND NO 2: Insertion of clause (c) to section 200a (1) of the IT Act specifically w.e.f,1.06.2015 The Id. CIT(A) has erred and not considered that TDS