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.

2,193 results for “condonation of delay”+ Rectification u/s 154clear

Sorted by relevance

Patna468Delhi270Mumbai234Pune223Chennai158Bangalore156Kolkata103Ahmedabad79Hyderabad67Jaipur58Chandigarh56Nagpur38Indore33Lucknow30Cochin29Visakhapatnam24Karnataka23Surat21Amritsar18Jodhpur17Raipur16Agra12Guwahati12Rajkot11Allahabad9Jabalpur8Cuttack6Dehradun4Panaji3SC2Telangana2Varanasi2Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 154134Section 234E119Section 143(1)67Section 200A56Rectification u/s 15453Section 1145TDS40Addition to Income33Section 143(3)30Condonation of Delay

RAM BHAROSE SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for Statistical purposes as indicated above

ITA 1066/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Jun 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena, JCIT - DR
Section 143(3)Section 156Section 234B

delay. However, the following submission will make it clear that it was a purported misreading of the facts and confusion which the ld. CIT (A) has adopted merely to reject the prayer for condonation. The replies on the allegations are as under: 4.2.1 It is clearly admitted by the ld. CIT(A) that after perusal of the assessment record that

CCI CHAMBERS CO-OP HSG SOC. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 17(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeal

Showing 1–20 of 2,193 · Page 1 of 110

...
28
Deduction26
Section 25025
ITA 3542/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Prakash Jotwani

delay is condoned. The ground No. 1 raised in the appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical No. 1 raised in the appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical No. 1 raised in the appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 4. As regards Ground No. 2, which concerns the merits of the As regards Ground No. 2, which concerns the merits

CCI CHAMBERS CO-OP HSG SOC. LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-17(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeal

ITA 3543/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Prakash Jotwani

delay is condoned. The ground No. 1 raised in the appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical No. 1 raised in the appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical No. 1 raised in the appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 4. As regards Ground No. 2, which concerns the merits of the As regards Ground No. 2, which concerns the merits

DUSHKAL GO SEWA SAMITI,SUMERPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), JODHPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 9/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2017-18
Section 11Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

Condonation of Delay in online filing Form-10B on 12.03.2020 before the Honorable Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)but the same was also got rejected without providing any opportunity of hearing and without considering the facts and circumstances. The assessee-trust also filed rectification application u/s 154

DUSHKAL GO SEWA SAMITI,SUMERPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), JODHPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5/JODH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2018-19
Section 11Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

Condonation of Delay in online filing Form-10B on 12.03.2020 before the Honorable Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)but the same was also got rejected without providing any opportunity of hearing and without considering the facts and circumstances. The assessee-trust also filed rectification application u/s 154

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

condonation of delay and therefore was unjustified in rejecting the appeal. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) was unreasonable and grossly erred by not considering the merits of the case before rejecting the appeal. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that intimation under section 143(1) of the Act [rectification order under section 154 of the Act dated

WHOLERY INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, RAJASTHAN

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

ITA 525/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 139(9)Section 154Section 154(1)(a)Section 44A

delay of 13 days has been condoned. The assessee has raised ground of appeal with the grievance that Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in passing rectification order u/s 154

SHREE SWAMI SAMARTH TRADING CO. LT,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A)-13, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 3551/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 144Section 271(1)(c)

rectification order u/s 154 of the Act has been used claiming it as for order u/s 144 of the Act, by the appellant to justify the delay in filing the instant appeal against order u/s 144 of the Act, which is passed on Page 4 of 18 ITA No.3551 & 3552/Mum/2015 Shree Swami Samarth Trading

SHREE SWAMI SAMARTH TRADING CO. P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A)-13, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 3552/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 144Section 271(1)(c)

rectification order u/s 154 of the Act has been used claiming it as for order u/s 144 of the Act, by the appellant to justify the delay in filing the instant appeal against order u/s 144 of the Act, which is passed on Page 4 of 18 ITA No.3551 & 3552/Mum/2015 Shree Swami Samarth Trading

NAVODAYA EDUCATION TRUST,RAICHUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELLARY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 49/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Kaul, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Devarathna Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 154

154 or not. Scope of rectification is limited to correcting error of fact or error of law, on the basis of material available on record. In the appeal under consideration the appellant has sought rectification on issues which will require fresh investigations of facts. The appellant has tried to use appeal against rejection of rectification application as a method

SURESH SAMAT HUF,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 719/HYD/2022[26Q Quarter 2-2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2023

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Muttha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(2)

condonation for delay i.e. pending application u/s 154. Accordingly, the appellant has been unable to account for the delay of 1762 days (1562 days after the receipt of the order u/s 200A till filing the rectification

SURESH SAMAT HUF,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, WARD-10(1),, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 721/HYD/2022[26Q Quarter 1 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2023

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Muttha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(2)

condonation for delay i.e. pending application u/s 154. Accordingly, the appellant has been unable to account for the delay of 1762 days (1562 days after the receipt of the order u/s 200A till filing the rectification

SURESH SAMAT HUF,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 718/HYD/2022[24Q Quarter 4 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2023

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Muttha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(2)

condonation for delay i.e. pending application u/s 154. Accordingly, the appellant has been unable to account for the delay of 1762 days (1562 days after the receipt of the order u/s 200A till filing the rectification

SURESH SAMAT HUF,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 720/HYD/2022[26Q Quarter 4 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2023

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Muttha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(2)

condonation for delay i.e. pending application u/s 154. Accordingly, the appellant has been unable to account for the delay of 1762 days (1562 days after the receipt of the order u/s 200A till filing the rectification

SURESH SAMAT HUF,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 716/HYD/2022[26Q Quarter 3 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2023

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Muttha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(2)

condonation for delay i.e. pending application u/s 154. Accordingly, the appellant has been unable to account for the delay of 1762 days (1562 days after the receipt of the order u/s 200A till filing the rectification

SURESH SAMAT HUF,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 715/HYD/2022[26Q Quarter2 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2023

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Muttha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(2)

condonation for delay i.e. pending application u/s 154. Accordingly, the appellant has been unable to account for the delay of 1762 days (1562 days after the receipt of the order u/s 200A till filing the rectification

SURESH SAMAT HUF,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 717/HYD/2022[26Q QUARTER-4 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2023

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Muttha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(2)

condonation for delay i.e. pending application u/s 154. Accordingly, the appellant has been unable to account for the delay of 1762 days (1562 days after the receipt of the order u/s 200A till filing the rectification

M/S. PUNYABHOOMI WELFARE SERVICE SOCIETY,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 528/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Varis Isani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

rectification application filed by the assessee u/s. 154 before the CPC was not maintainable as scope of Section 154 is very limited to the mistake apparent from record, and debatable issues cannot be decided within the scope of Section 154 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) observed that the claim of the assessee that it has expenses

SMT. SHILPA GOPALA REDDY,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 3(3)(4), BANGALORE

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

ITA 2072/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Sri.Venkatesh KumarFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Council for DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 246ASection 249(3)

condonation of delay Synopsis Date Events 27.12.2016 Assessment order passed u/s 143(3) 09.06.2017 Rectification petition u/s 154 filed. 08.11.2017 Application

KARSHAK VIDYA PARISHAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 475/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.394 & 395/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Church Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaalc0017F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.476 & 393/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Aurora Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaata8751C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.475 & 392/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Karshak Vidya Parishad, Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaatk5390B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna,Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2024

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna,DR
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

condonation of delay in filing Form 10BB for both the A.Ys. 12. In so far as various case laws relied upon by the learned Counsel for the assessee including the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Xavier Kalavani Mandal (P) Ltd, we find that in all those cases, the issue before