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.

66 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 12clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai2,044Delhi1,935Mumbai1,890Kolkata1,167Bangalore1,029Pune995Hyderabad688Ahmedabad632Jaipur610Surat381Raipur331Chandigarh331Nagpur309Karnataka243Visakhapatnam232Indore226Amritsar209Cochin176Lucknow172Rajkot169Cuttack146Panaji109Patna89Calcutta66SC51Guwahati50Jodhpur46Agra42Dehradun39Telangana38Jabalpur28Allahabad26Varanasi24Ranchi11Orissa9Rajasthan7Kerala5Himachal Pradesh4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Andhra Pradesh1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1

Key Topics

Section 26331Section 260A23Section 6819Limitation/Time-bar14Section 143(3)12Addition to Income11Condonation of Delay11Section 1010Section 12A

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 KOLKATA vs. PREMIER TIE UP PVT LTD

ITAT/81/2022HC Calcutta26 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

For Respondent: Mr. Dhruba Ghosh, Adv
Section 34Section 36(1)Section 36(2)

delaying a decision on such application cannot midway turn around and decide not to pursue the challenge application, and then prefer an independent application under Section 14 of the Act before the Court, basically on the same ground raised in the former, urging that de jure inability of the arbitrator disqualifies him to continue proceedings. The learned Judge was right

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INDIAN ROADWAYS CORPORATION LTD.

ITAT/62/2020HC Calcutta

Showing 1–20 of 66 · Page 1 of 4

10
Exemption8
Long Term Capital Gains6
Section 14A5
08 Feb 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

For Respondent: Mr. Atarup Banerjee
Section 5

12. Though there is delay of 184 days in filing the first appeal but taking into consideration the period for obtaining the certified copy of the said judgment and order and period of illness this Court is of the view that sufficient cause has been shown on the part of the appellants whereby the said delay can be condoned

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S Y R TRADERS PVT LTD

ITAT/198/2023HC Calcutta17 Nov 2023

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 197Section 197(17)Section 264

Section 264 of the said Act for the assessments year 2016-17 and 2017-18 refusing to condone the delay cannot be sustained and the same should be set aside. 11. In so far as the rejection order passed in respect of the assessment year 2018-19 is concerned, he would submit that since the respondent no.2 has proceeded

M/S SHEO SHAKTI COKE INDUSTRIES vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 37, KOLKATA

ITAT/2/2022HC Calcutta08 Apr 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 5

condoned. The Review application being RVW 2 of 2022 be heard on merits. 10. The office is directed to register the review application. 11. CAN 1 of 2025 is accordingly disposed of. RVW 2 of 2022 1. The present review application arises out of the judgment dated 19.08.2019 passed in WP.CT 153 of 2019 The review has been assigned

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 KOLKATA vs. SEVEN STAR STEELS LTD

Appeal stands dismissed and the

ITAT/43/2025HC Calcutta05 May 2025

Bench: :

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143ASection 153ASection 245B(4)Section 260A

condonation of delay being IA No: GA/1/2025 is allowed. This appeal is filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenging the order dated 5.3.2024 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in I.T.(SS)A No. 118/Kol/2023, C.O. No.15/Kol/2023 for the assessment year 2015-16. The revenue

AKHILESH SINGH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 13/4 KOLKATA

ITAT/180/2025HC Calcutta28 Oct 2025

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK,HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI

Section 260A

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is at the behest of the assessee and directed against the order dated June 12, 2025 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC Bench, Kolkata in ITA/2216/Kol/2024 relating to the assessment year 2017-2018. The learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that, the appellant is an individual assessee. The appellant

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-III vs. M/S. VIVADA INLAND WATERWAYS LTD.

Accordingly, the appeal (ITAT/11/2011) stands dismissed

ITAT/11/2011HC Calcutta06 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 260ASection 41(1)

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 3 We have perused the order passed by the tribunal which is impugned before us and we find that the tribunal has approved the factual finding recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The matter pertains to the applicability of the provisions of Section 41(1) of the Act. The tribunal after

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ASANSOL vs. M/S EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITAT/153/2022HC Calcutta27 Sept 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya Date : September 27, 2022. Appearance: Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. … For Appellant Mr. Rajeev Kumar Agarwal, Adv. …For Respondent. Ga/1/2022 The Court :- We Have Heard Ms. Smita Das De, Learned Standing Counsel For The Appellant & Mr. Rajeev Kumar Agarwal, Learned Counsel For The Respondent. There Is A Delay Of 511 Days In Filing The Appeal. On Perusal Of The Application We Are Satisfied That Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Not Being Able To Prefer The Appeal Within The Period Of Limitation. The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned. Accordingly, The Application For Condonation Of Delay Is Allowed.

Section 260ASection 28Section 41

condonation of delay is allowed. ITAT/153/2022 This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated September 24, 2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ‘B’ Bench Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA Nos. 890 & 891 [Kol] of 2019 for the assessment year 2009-2010. The revenue

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S NARSINGH ISPAT LTD

ITAT/80/2024HC Calcutta11 Mar 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya Date : 11Th March, 2024 Appearance : M S. Smita Das De, Adv. Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. Kartik Kurmy, Adv. (Vc) Mr. Indranil Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Subrata Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Debayan Dutta, Adv. …For Respondent. The Court : We Have Heard Ms. Smita Das De, Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For The Appellant Revenue & Mr. Kartik Kurmy, Learned Counsel Appearing For The Respondent Assessee. There Is A Delay Of 59 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Given By The Appellant Department For Not Preferring The Appeal Within The Period Of Limitation. Hence, The Condone Delay Petition Is Allowed & Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260ASection 68

12 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/80/2024 IA No: GA/2/2024 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, KOLKATA VS. M/S. NARSINGH ISPAT LTD. BEFORE : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA Date : 11th March, 2024 Appearance : M s. Smita Das De, Adv. Mr. Prithu Dudhoria

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9,KOLKATA vs. MANJU OSATWAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and

ITAT/96/2021HC Calcutta11 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

For Appellant: Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Swapna Das, Adv
Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 180Section 182Section 260ASection 263

condonation of delay stands disposed of. ITAT No. 96 of 2021 4. This appeal by the revenue filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (the Act for brevity) is directed against the order dated 15th January, 2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA No. 707/Kol/2019 for the assessment year

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. RITIN LAKHMANI

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

ITAT/127/2022HC Calcutta22 Nov 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Dated : November 22, 2022. Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. Subhas Agarwal, Adv …For Respondent The Court :- We Have Heard Learned Counsel Appearing For The Respective Parties. We Have Perused The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Petition & Found Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Condonation Of Delay. Accordingly, The Application Is Allowed & The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned. These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Challenging The Orders Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal In Various Assessment Years. The Details Of The Appeal Numbers, Case Number Before The Learned Tribunal & The Assessment Year Under Consideration Are Set Out In A Tabulated Form Hereunder : Sl. No. Itat No. Date Of Order Assessment Year 1.

Section 10Section 260ASection 263Section 68

12, 13, 14 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/129/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022; GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus REETA LAKHMANI ITAT/127/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus RITIN LAKHMANI ITAT/128/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus JAIKISHAN LAKHMANI

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. RAVISH LAKHMANI

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

ITAT/133/2022HC Calcutta22 Nov 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Dated : November 22, 2022. Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. Subhas Agarwal, Adv …For Respondent The Court :- We Have Heard Learned Counsel Appearing For The Respective Parties. We Have Perused The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Petition & Found Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Condonation Of Delay. Accordingly, The Application Is Allowed & The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned. These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Challenging The Orders Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal In Various Assessment Years. The Details Of The Appeal Numbers, Case Number Before The Learned Tribunal & The Assessment Year Under Consideration Are Set Out In A Tabulated Form Hereunder : Sl. No. Itat No. Date Of Order Assessment Year 1.

Section 10Section 260ASection 263Section 68

12, 13, 14 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/129/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022; GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus REETA LAKHMANI ITAT/127/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus RITIN LAKHMANI ITAT/128/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus JAIKISHAN LAKHMANI

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. PRAVASH KUMAR LAKMANI

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

ITAT/130/2022HC Calcutta22 Nov 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Dated : November 22, 2022. Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. Subhas Agarwal, Adv …For Respondent The Court :- We Have Heard Learned Counsel Appearing For The Respective Parties. We Have Perused The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Petition & Found Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Condonation Of Delay. Accordingly, The Application Is Allowed & The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned. These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Challenging The Orders Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal In Various Assessment Years. The Details Of The Appeal Numbers, Case Number Before The Learned Tribunal & The Assessment Year Under Consideration Are Set Out In A Tabulated Form Hereunder : Sl. No. Itat No. Date Of Order Assessment Year 1.

Section 10Section 260ASection 263Section 68

12, 13, 14 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/129/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022; GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus REETA LAKHMANI ITAT/127/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus RITIN LAKHMANI ITAT/128/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus JAIKISHAN LAKHMANI

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 10, KOLKATA vs. SUJIT KUMAR BHAGAT

ITAT/275/2017HC Calcutta25 Nov 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

12 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE IA No.GA/2/2017 (Old No.GA/2528/2017) ITAT/275/2017 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOLKATA -10, KOLKATA -Versus- SHRI SUJIT KUMAR BHAGAT IA No.GA/1/2017 (Old No.GA/2527/2017) ITAT/275/2017 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOLKATA-10, KOLKATA -Versus- SHRI SUJIT KUMAR BHAGAT BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 1 KOLKATA vs. CORPORATE ISPAT ALLOYS LTD

ITAT/119/2022HC Calcutta14 Nov 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 2(22)(e)Section 260A

condonation of delay (IA No.GA/1/2022) stands allowed. This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, is directed against the order dated 9th August, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in IT(SS)A Nos.113 & 114/Kol/2017 for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The revenue

CIT (EXEMPTION) , KOLKATA vs. HARNARAYAN RAJDULARI DEVI TAPARIA - CHARITABALE TRUST

ITA/111/2019HC Calcutta01 Jul 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 2Section 2(15)Section 80G

Delay condoned. In view of the judgment of this Court in 'Ananda Social And Educational Trust v. Commissioner of Income Tax and Another', [(2020) 17 SCC 254], which judgment has approved the view taken by the Delhi High Court in 'Director of Income Tax v. Foundation of Ophthalmic & Optometry Research Education Centre' [(2013) 355 ITR 361], the question

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3 KOLKATA vs. M/S. BRITANIA INDUSTRIES LTD

ITAT/111/2019HC Calcutta25 Aug 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 2Section 2(15)Section 80G

Delay condoned. In view of the judgment of this Court in 'Ananda Social And Educational Trust v. Commissioner of Income Tax and Another', [(2020) 17 SCC 254], which judgment has approved the view taken by the Delhi High Court in 'Director of Income Tax v. Foundation of Ophthalmic & Optometry Research Education Centre' [(2013) 355 ITR 361], the question

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ASANSOL vs. MANINDRA MOHAN MAZUMDAR

ITAT/27/2023HC Calcutta15 Mar 2023

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 2ASection 7A

12 MAT 27 of 2023 with CAN 1 of 2023 CAN 2 of 2023 Regional Provident Fund Commissioner West Bengal & Ors. -Versus- M/s Muramen Travels & Ors. Ms. Aparna Banerjee Mr. Shiv Chandra Prasad …….for the appellants Mr. Anant Kr. Shaw Mr. Ravi Kr. Debey ...... for the respondent No. 1 Mr. Mainak Ganguly .....for the respondent

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-12,KOLKATA vs. M/S.SOORAJMULL NAGARMULL

In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the substantial questions of

ITAT/46/2020HC Calcutta23 Nov 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 148Section 260ASection 41Section 41(1)

condoned the delay in filing the appeal. GA No. 01 of 2020 is allowed. 3. This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Act is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench Kolkata (Tribunal), dated 20.07.2018 in ITA No. 1907/Kol/2016 for the assessment year 2001-2002. ITAT

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5,KOLKATA vs. SMT SUMAN KOTHARI

ITAT/238/2022HC Calcutta03 Jan 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 3Rd January, 2023. Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mita, Adv. ..For Appellant Mr. Pranit Bag , Adv. Mr. A. K. Mishra, Adv. Mr. Debdatta Saha, Adv. …For Respondent Re: Ga/1/2022 The Court:- Heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, Learned Advocate For The Appellant & Mr. Pranit Bag, Learned Advocate For The Respondent. There Is A Delay Of 1126 Days In Filing The Appeal. Though The Reasons Given In The Affidavit Are Not Convincing The Issues Involved In The Appeal Had Been Decided By This Court In Earlier Matters, This Court Exercises Discretion & Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal. Accordingly, The Application Is Allowed.

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 260A

condone the delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly, the application is allowed. ITAT/238/2022 This appeal filed by the revenue under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] is directed against the order dated 15.2.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Kolkata [Tribunal] in ITA No.2467/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15 the revenue