Search: condonation of delay | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

33,197 results for “condonation of delay”+ Condonation of Delayclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai5,405 Mumbai4,556 Delhi4,102 Kolkata2,611 Pune2,471 Bangalore2,146 Ahmedabad1,605 Hyderabad1,393 Patna1,037 Jaipur958 Chandigarh701 Cochin655 Cuttack600 Indore562 Surat556 Nagpur555 Visakhapatnam431 Raipur427 Amritsar405 Lucknow374 Rajkot361 Agra334 Panaji210 Dehradun145 Guwahati125 Jodhpur113 Ranchi96 Jabalpur90 SC79 Allahabad62 Varanasi26 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1 VIKRAMAJIT SEN SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1 R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1

Key Topics

Addition to Income50 Section 153A33 Section 25028 Condonation of Delay26 Limitation/Time-bar25 Section 80I24 Section 143(3)23 Section 14722 Section 12A21 Penalty

SH. DAL CHAND SHARMA,ALWAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), ALWAR, ALWAR

ITA 101/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 May 2024AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri A. S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 270A

delay,\none should be very cautious while condoning the delay. The delay of 144 days\ncannot

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

ITA 7339/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai

Showing 1–20 of 33,197 · Page 1 of 1,660

...

19

Natural Justice18

23 Feb 2026

AY 2015-16

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

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

Section 245

condone the delay as well, then such delay delay as well, then such delay can be condoned

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 ()

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

condone the delay as well, then such delay delay as well, then such delay can be condoned

ARTI SHAILEN TOPIWALA,ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 34(1)(1), MUMBAI, BKC, BANDRA EAST, MUMBAI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

ITA 4383/MUM/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Om Prakash Kant () Ita No. 4383 & 4384/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Arti Shailen Topiwala Ito, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai B-701, Parimal Apartment, C.D. Income Tax Appellate Barfiwala Road, Andheri West, Vs. Tribunal, Mumbai- 400058 Mumbai- 400020 Pan No. Aacpt 3505 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Rajesh ShahFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Mohan –SR. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

condoning the delay. The delay of 2673 dayscannot be condoned simply delay. The delay

ARTI SHAILEN TOPIWALA,ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 34(1)(1), MUMBAI, BKC, BANDRA EAST, MUMBAI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

ITA 4384/MUM/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Om Prakash Kant () Ita No. 4383 & 4384/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Arti Shailen Topiwala Ito, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai B-701, Parimal Apartment, C.D. Income Tax Appellate Barfiwala Road, Andheri West, Vs. Tribunal, Mumbai- 400058 Mumbai- 400020 Pan No. Aacpt 3505 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Rajesh ShahFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Mohan –SR. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

condoning the delay. The delay of 2673 dayscannot be condoned simply delay. The delay

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 703/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 147Section 20Section 202Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

delay, one should be very cautious while condoning the delay. The delay of 2491 cannot be condoned

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 704/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 147Section 20Section 202Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

delay, one should be very cautious while condoning the delay. The delay of 2491 cannot be condoned

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 700/BANG/2024[2013-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2024AY 2013-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 147Section 20Section 202Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

delay, one should be very cautious while condoning the delay. The delay of 2491 cannot be condoned

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 702/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 147Section 20Section 202Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

delay, one should be very cautious while condoning the delay. The delay of 2491 cannot be condoned

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed for statistical purposes

ITA 423/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2024AY 2017-18

Section 132Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

condonation of delay application for seeking condonation for delay\nin filing the appeal\nका कार्यल\nITA

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed for statistical purposes

ITA 425/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2024AY 2013-14

For Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

condonation of delay application for seeking condonation for delay\nin filing the appeal\nका कार्यल\nPage

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

condonation of delay read as under : “SUBMISSIONS ON DELAY 2. The Appellant in respect of delay

SMT SHRISHTI GUPTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 34(3)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

ITA 3163/MUM/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Shrishti Gupta, Ito34(3)(5) 301, Swati Building, North Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Vs. Avenue Santa Cruz (W), Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400054. Pan No. Alapd 2228 A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Dinkle Hariya

Section 144Section 147Section 69

delay. The appellant who seeks condonation delay. The appellant who seeks condonation of delay therefore

M/S. SJS ENTERPRISES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 972/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year:2017-18

For Appellant: Sri Rony Anthony, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234B

delay, one should be very cautious while condoning the delay. The delay of 2491 cannot be condoned

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

condonation of delay. He submitted that since condoning the delay in filing of the appeal is as per the the discretion

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

condonation of delay. He submitted that since condoning the delay in filing of the appeal is as per the the discretion

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

condonation of delay. He submitted that since condoning the delay in filing of the appeal is as per the the discretion

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

condonation of delay. He submitted that since condoning the delay in filing of the appeal is as per the the discretion

M/S. S J S ENTERPRISES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 327/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Years: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rony Anthony, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Guru Kumar S., D.R

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250

delay, one should be very cautious while condoning the delay. The delay of 2491 cannot be condoned

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)

condonation of delay Commissioner or Chief Commissioner for condonation of delay Commissioner or Chief Commissioner for condonation