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 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 9clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai2,844Mumbai2,805Delhi2,348Kolkata1,466Pune1,443Bangalore1,317Hyderabad948Ahmedabad838Jaipur706Surat449Chandigarh436Nagpur381Raipur374Visakhapatnam325Patna305Indore289Amritsar277Lucknow266Karnataka261Cochin259Rajkot235Cuttack167Panaji137Agra83Calcutta68Guwahati65Dehradun62SC57Jodhpur53Telangana41Allahabad34Jabalpur31Ranchi30Varanasi30Rajasthan9Orissa7Kerala7Himachal Pradesh4Punjab & Haryana3Andhra Pradesh2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1

M/S MERIDIAN PROMOTERS (P) lTD., vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the Appeal is allowed and the order, dated 26

ITTA/157/2019HC Andhra Pradesh17 Oct 2019

Bench: The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) In Ita.No.0782/Cc-2,Vizag/Cit(A)-

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 260A

Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The concept of such a liberal approach cannot be equated with doing injustice to the other party. The Court cannot condone delay in a case, where the Court concludes that there is no justification for the delay. The discretion has to be exercised within the MSRM, J & JUD,J ITTA_157_2019 6 reasonable

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI KOUNDINYA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY

ITTA/179/2019HC Andhra Pradesh29 Oct 2019

Bench: C.PRAVEEN KUMAR,CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

9 App Case 605 58 AIR 1968 SC 718 CJ, MSM,J and DVSS,J W.P.Nos.13203 of 2020 & batch 82 of certain raw materials in order to encourage export of woolen garments to Afghanistan. Subsequently, only partial concessions and not full concessions were extended as announced. The Supreme Court held that the Government was estopped by its promise. Thereafter