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.

7 results for “condonation of delay”+ Short Term Capital Gainsclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai416Chennai341Kolkata217Delhi153Ahmedabad145Hyderabad123Jaipur118Bangalore112Karnataka103Chandigarh85Pune70Surat50Calcutta46Nagpur35Panaji35Indore30Visakhapatnam24Lucknow24Raipur22Rajkot19Cuttack18Agra13Ranchi9Cochin9SC9Amritsar7Jodhpur6Patna6Guwahati6Jabalpur5Varanasi5Dehradun3Allahabad3Telangana2Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 250(6)10Section 2639Addition to Income6Section 249(2)4Section 143(3)3Section 1443Section 143(2)3Long Term Capital Gains3Disallowance

MOHMMAD. MUZAFFAR. BEIGH,,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(5), SRINAGAR

In the result, the grounds No

ITA 99/ASR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

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

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 250(6)Section 292B

delay of 101 days is condoned. 3. Brief fact of the case is that the assessee’s case was reopened u/s 148 on basis of the information from Annual Information Report/Central Information Branch for investment in purchase of share/mutual funds/RBI Bonds aggregating to amount of Rs.1,79,91,721/-. The investment was made in previous years. The ld. AO during

SHRI AMRITPAL SINGH (PROP),JALANDHAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 1, JALANDHAR

3
Condonation of Delay3
Section 2502
Section 1482

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 425/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

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

Section 110Section 263Section 54D

delay for 14 days is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds: “1. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by worthy PCIT -1 is arbitrary, whimsical, bad in law and deserves to be quashed. 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order

BHAGAT PARKASH KAMAL SHARMA,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1 (1), JAMMU

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

ITA 184/ASR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 127Section 127(2)Section 144Section 249(2)Section 250Section 68

short-term capital gain for sale of land related to 1/3 share of the assessee amount of Rs.21 lacs. Being aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) had rejected the appeal of the assessee without considering the ground, only on point of limitation for delay filing of appeal. Being aggrieved assessee filed

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)

short delay is condoned and appeals are admitted on merits. 6. There is sole issue challenged by the appellant regarding confirmation of 10 % of the addition made by AO in respect of the sale of Flats and 10 % as against the 20% disallowance by AO in respect of the commercial open space on presumption and assumptions on identical facts

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)

short delay is condoned and appeals are admitted on merits. 6. There is sole issue challenged by the appellant regarding confirmation of 10 % of the addition made by AO in respect of the sale of Flats and 10 % as against the 20% disallowance by AO in respect of the commercial open space on presumption and assumptions on identical facts

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)

short delay is condoned and appeals are admitted on merits. 6. There is sole issue challenged by the appellant regarding confirmation of 10 % of the addition made by AO in respect of the sale of Flats and 10 % as against the 20% disallowance by AO in respect of the commercial open space on presumption and assumptions on identical facts

MEHARJIT SINGH DHILLON,BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), BATHINDA

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

ITA 426/ASR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Agrawal, Adv
Section 144Section 249(2)Section 250Section 69A

short-term capital gains amounting to Rs. 63.32 lacs. 4. The matter carried in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) has been dismissed as non- maintainable u/s 249(2) of the Act, on account of delay in filing the same by 160 days. The ld. AR in course of hearing submitted that the delay has not been condoned