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 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 206Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Pune157Delhi149Bangalore117Chennai80Raipur39Mumbai25Karnataka22Kolkata18Cochin13Panaji10Rajkot9Dehradun8Lucknow7Hyderabad6Chandigarh6Jodhpur5Jaipur4Amritsar4Ahmedabad3Cuttack3Indore3Nagpur2Varanasi2

Key Topics

Section 143(2)6Section 43B4Section 206C4Section 36(1)(va)2Section 206C(7)2Penalty2TDS2Disallowance2Addition to Income2

SHRI UMESHKUMAR HARILALA SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, TDS-3, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 8/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Mukesh Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 206Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 206C(7)Section 271CSection 44A

delay is condoned. 7. The Ld. A.R. submitted that TCS is not applicable on the sale of scrap as the assessee is not in the manufacturing activity and act as trader. AS per Section 206C

Limitation/Time-bar2

AARK INFOSOFT PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 681/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Aark Infosoft Private Limited, The Acit, 45, Shetrunjay, 2Nd Floor, Above Circle-1(1)(1), Central Bank Of India, Bhattha Ahmedabad Cross Road, Paldi, Ahmedabad Gujarat-380007 Pan : Aahca 9986 H अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Divyang Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21.02.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 27.07.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Issuing A Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act? 2. Whether On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Making Disallowance Of Employees' Contribution To Pf & Esic Of Rs.5,51,657/- U/S 36(1) (Va) Of The Act?

For Appellant: Shri Divyang Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139(9)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 269SSection 36(1)Section 40Section 68

206C to the person furnishing his return of income; (b) such certificate is produced within a period of two years specified under sub-section (14) of section 155; (ii) the amount of compulsory deposit, if any, claimed to have been made under the Compulsory Deposit Scheme (Income-tax Payers) Act, 1974 (38 of 1974); (d) where regular books of account

GUJARAT BOROSIL LIMITED,BHARUCH vs. DCIT - CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 29/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: 05/05/2022
Section 139(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

206C(6A)/206C(7) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY. 2014-15. 2. The ground of appeal raised by assessee reads as under: “1. The order passed by the learned CIT(A) is bad in law, being contrary to the provisions of the Act and without considering the written submission of the appellant. 2. The Learned