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.

8 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 191clear

Sorted by relevance

Patna150Chennai110Karnataka105Nagpur94Mumbai78Delhi65Bangalore58Cochin38Jaipur33Kolkata32Rajkot20Visakhapatnam16Lucknow14Ahmedabad13Chandigarh13Hyderabad12Pune11Agra8Cuttack6Indore6Surat5Guwahati5Varanasi5Panaji4SC3Allahabad3Raipur2Rajasthan2Punjab & Haryana1Dehradun1Calcutta1Andhra Pradesh1Jodhpur1Amritsar1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 250(6)10Section 271(1)(c)6Section 249(2)5Section 249(3)5Addition to Income5Limitation/Time-bar5Condonation of Delay5Section 2743Section 271(1)

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,ASHOK NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 103/AGR/2025[FSGPK3708E. KOIPK9828G]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Apr 2025

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250(6)

191 days. 6.1 ITA No. 103/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against impugned order dated 29.11.2024 by a delay of about 28 days. 6.2 ITA No. 104/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 26.07.2024 by a delay of about 148 days. 6.3 ITA No. 105/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,ASHOK NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

3
Penalty3
Natural Justice3
ITA 104/AGR/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed
ITAT Agra
04 Apr 2025
AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250(6)

191 days. 6.1 ITA No. 103/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against impugned order dated 29.11.2024 by a delay of about 28 days. 6.2 ITA No. 104/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 26.07.2024 by a delay of about 148 days. 6.3 ITA No. 105/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,ASHOK NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 106/AGR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250(6)

191 days. 6.1 ITA No. 103/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against impugned order dated 29.11.2024 by a delay of about 28 days. 6.2 ITA No. 104/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 26.07.2024 by a delay of about 148 days. 6.3 ITA No. 105/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,ASHOK NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 105/AGR/2025[FSGPK3708E]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Apr 2025

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250(6)

191 days. 6.1 ITA No. 103/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against impugned order dated 29.11.2024 by a delay of about 28 days. 6.2 ITA No. 104/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 26.07.2024 by a delay of about 148 days. 6.3 ITA No. 105/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,VILLAGE KHIRIYA DEWAT POST KHIRIYA DEWAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 95/AGR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250(6)

191 days. 6.1 ITA No. 103/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against impugned order dated 29.11.2024 by a delay of about 28 days. 6.2 ITA No. 104/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 26.07.2024 by a delay of about 148 days. 6.3 ITA No. 105/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated

VECTUS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,GWALIOR vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8/AGR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra06 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

191. As a result, we hold that Dilip N. Shroff Case (supra) treats omnibus show-cause notices as betraying non-application of mind and disapproves of the practice, to be particular, of issuing notices in printed form without deleting or striking off the inapplicable parts of that generic notice. Conclusion: We have, thus, answered the reference as required

VECTUS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,GWALIOR vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1) , GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7/AGR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra06 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

191. As a result, we hold that Dilip N. Shroff Case (supra) treats omnibus show-cause notices as betraying non-application of mind and disapproves of the practice, to be particular, of issuing notices in printed form without deleting or striking off the inapplicable parts of that generic notice. Conclusion: We have, thus, answered the reference as required

VECTUS INDUSTRIES LTD.,GWALIOR vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6/AGR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra06 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

191. As a result, we hold that Dilip N. Shroff Case (supra) treats omnibus show-cause notices as betraying non-application of mind and disapproves of the practice, to be particular, of issuing notices in printed form without deleting or striking off the inapplicable parts of that generic notice. Conclusion: We have, thus, answered the reference as required