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.

4 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 120(4)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai101Mumbai94Chandigarh87Delhi64Pune50Kolkata48Raipur45Hyderabad40Bangalore38Jaipur36Cochin17Cuttack16Rajkot15Ahmedabad10Visakhapatnam8Indore8Patna7Lucknow7Varanasi6SC6Guwahati5Jodhpur5Nagpur4Amritsar4Surat4Jabalpur2Agra1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 250(6)9Section 143(3)4Section 104Disallowance4Addition to Income4Long Term Capital Gains3Section 132

SHER-E- KASHMIR COLLAGE OF EDUCATION ( UNIT OF ) PIR PANCHAL EDUCATION TRUST,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD , JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 190/ASR/2023[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar25 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 10Section 13Section 13(1)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

delay for 3080 days is condoned. I.T.A. No. 190/Asr/2023 3 Assessment Year: 2009-10 3. The assessee has taken the following ground: “1. That the order of the Assessing Officer as well as the order of Learned CIT(A) are both against the facts of the case and are untenable in law. 2. That the worthy

SHRI AMAR NATH CHOUDHARY,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU

ITA 35/ASR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

section 250(6) of the Income tax Act, 1961 merely on assumptions, presumptions, surmises and conjectures, without appreciating the factual, legal and statutory position of the Law and facts of the case. Amar Nath Choudhary v. Dy. CIT 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming 10% of the total

SHRI AMAR NATH CHOUDHARY,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY CMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU

ITA 36/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

section 250(6) of the Income tax Act, 1961 merely on assumptions, presumptions, surmises and conjectures, without appreciating the factual, legal and statutory position of the Law and facts of the case. Amar Nath Choudhary v. Dy. CIT 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming 10% of the total

SHRI AMAR NATH CHOUDHARY,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRA L CIRCLE, JAMMU

ITA 34/ASR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

section 250(6) of the Income tax Act, 1961 merely on assumptions, presumptions, surmises and conjectures, without appreciating the factual, legal and statutory position of the Law and facts of the case. Amar Nath Choudhary v. Dy. CIT 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming 10% of the total