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.

125 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 5clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai4,152Mumbai4,014Delhi3,275Kolkata2,191Pune1,822Bangalore1,683Ahmedabad1,396Hyderabad1,191Jaipur925Patna747Surat637Chandigarh572Indore533Nagpur508Cochin464Raipur411Lucknow395Visakhapatnam385Rajkot334Amritsar313Karnataka301Cuttack286Panaji175Agra159Calcutta125Guwahati104Dehradun101Jodhpur82Allahabad69SC63Jabalpur63Ranchi59Telangana48Varanasi37Andhra Pradesh17Rajasthan11Orissa10Kerala7Punjab & Haryana6Himachal Pradesh5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Gauhati1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1VIKRAMAJIT SEN SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Section 26381Section 260A59Condonation of Delay37Section 143(3)31Addition to Income30Section 6829Limitation/Time-bar23Section 143(2)15Long Term Capital Gains

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 125 · Page 1 of 7

13
Exemption13
Section 1011
Section 69C11
08 Feb 2021

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

For Respondent: Mr. Atarup Banerjee
Section 5

Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1963 was also filed praying for condonation of delay of 184 days in preferring

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. EVENT DEVELOPERS PVT LTD

ITAT/58/2025HC Calcutta19 May 2025

Bench: The Hon’Ble High Court Circuit Bench At Port Blair On 09-01-2025 & Thereafter The File Was Processed For Approval From The Department For Preferring The Appeal.

Section 5

section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condoning the delay in preferring the appeal. On a perusal of the said

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S VISHNU DISTRIBUTORS PVT LIMITED

ITAT/56/2025HC Calcutta05 May 2025

Bench: The Hon’Ble High Court Circuit Bench At Port Blair On 09-01-2025 & Thereafter The File Was Processed For Approval From The Department For Preferring The Appeal.

Section 5

section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condoning the delay in preferring the appeal. On a perusal of the said

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

5 6. It would transpire from the records that the company had thereafter upon considering the matter on the basis of the resolution taken by the Board Members on 13th November, 2019 by letter in writing dated 2nd December, 2019 called upon the petitioner to refund the excess remuneration paid to him for the financial years

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

condonation of delay under the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 1963 Act) for condoning

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

sections 139(5) and 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act read with Circular No. 9 of 2015 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes to contend that the appellant ought to have made an application for condonation of delay

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1 KOLKATA vs. ASISH KUMAR GHOSH

ITA/2/2021HC Calcutta01 Apr 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 1St April, 2022 Appearance :-

Section 115Section 143(3)Section 68

5 which was admittedly issued in favour of the assessee on 27th January, 2021. The second issue would be whether the revenue can now contend that Circular dated 4th December, 2020 covers cases only when the appeals are filed with an application for condonation of delay between 1st April, 2019 and 31st January, 2020 and the appeal in the assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. ASISH KUMAR GHOSH

ITAT/73/2021HC Calcutta01 Apr 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 1St April, 2022 Appearance :-

Section 115Section 143(3)Section 68

5 which was admittedly issued in favour of the assessee on 27th January, 2021. The second issue would be whether the revenue can now contend that Circular dated 4th December, 2020 covers cases only when the appeals are filed with an application for condonation of delay between 1st April, 2019 and 31st January, 2020 and the appeal in the assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BEEKAY STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED

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

ITAT/177/2021HC Calcutta25 Jan 2022

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

Section 260ASection 263Section 43B

condonation of delay is allowed and disposed of. ITAT 177 of 2021 This appeal by the revenue filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated 20th November, 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA/954/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2012-13. The revenue

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S ORCHID GRIHA NIRMAN PVT LTD

ITAT/108/2021HC Calcutta31 Jan 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Dated January 31, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. P.K. Bhowmick, Adv. Mr. Asok Bhowmick, Adv. … For The Appellant Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Das, Adv. ..For The Respondent The Court :- We Have Heard Mr. P.K. Bhowmick, Learned Standing Counsel For The Appellant/Revenue Duly Assisted By Mr. Asok

Section 10Section 147Section 263ASection 45(3)

condonation of delay is disposed of. ITAT/108/2021 This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 263A of the Income Tax Act, (the Act) is directed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench Kolkata (Tribunal) dated 26th September, 2018 in ITAT/569/Kol/2015 for the assessment year 2006-07. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-XII, KOLKATA vs. MANOJ MURARKA

ITA/181/2011HC Calcutta24 Nov 2022

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

Section 260A

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, is directed against the order dated 21st May, 2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA No. 1239/Kol/2003 and ITA No.1180/Kol/2003 for the assessment year 1998-99. The appeal was admitted on 28th November, 2011 on the following substantial questions of law: 2 (i) Whether

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4 , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SHELTER PROJECT LTD

ITAT/60/2020HC Calcutta04 Feb 2022

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

For Appellant: Mr. S. N. Dutta, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv
Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 260ASection 53A

condonation of delay stands allowed. Re: ITAT/60/2020 We have perused this appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961(the Act) as directed against the order dated 17th October, 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A Bench, Kolkata in ITA No.737/Kol/2014 for the assessment year 2009-10. The revenue has raised the following substantial question

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1,KOLKATA vs. M/S. ABA EARTHLINE COMMUNICATIONS LTD

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITAT/111/2021HC Calcutta01 Aug 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 1St August, 2022. Appearance:-

Section 250Section 260ASection 68

condonation of delay is allowed. ITAT/111/2021 This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 9th November, 2018, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “D” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in I.T.A No. 1141/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2012-13. The revenue has raised

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

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL KOLKATA 2 vs. DEEP HOLDING PVT LTD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITAT/96/2024HC Calcutta01 May 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

Section 144Section 260ASection 263Section 263(1)

condone delay application [GA/1/2024] is allowed. The short question involved in this appeal is whether the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) could have exercised his jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act. Essentially the matter pertains to estimation of income and estimation of profit. It is not the case of the PCIT that the assessing officer did not consider

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S BROLLY DEALCOM LLP

Accordingly, the appeal (ITAT/48/2021) stands dismissed

ITAT/48/2021HC Calcutta16 Jun 2022

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

Section 260ASection 263

condonation of delay (IA No.GA/1/2021) is allowed. Re: ITAT/48/2021: This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ for brevity) is directed against the order dated 1st February, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA No.1543/Kol/2013 for the assessment year

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

LABDHAN MERCHANTS PVT. LTD & ANR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD1(4) KOLKATA & ORS

ITAT/339/2017HC Calcutta04 Feb 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 260ASection 263Section 68

condonation of delay is allowed. Re.: ITAT No.339 of 2017 This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 1st March, 2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ Bench, Kolkata in ITA No. 725/Kol/2015 for the assessment year 2009-10. The assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, KOLKATA vs. SHRI RAKESH KUMAR KHEMUKA

ITAT/163/2021HC Calcutta20 Jul 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak Date : 20Th July, 2022. Appearance :- Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee , Adv. ….For Appellant. Mr. Abhratosh Majumder, Sr Adv. Mr. Avra Mazumder, Adv. …For Respondent

Section 260A

condonation of delay is allowed. ITAT/163/2021 & ITAT/172/2021 These appeals have been filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act for brevity) against the common order dated 28th August, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata in ITA No. 1483/Kol/2019 and M.A. No. 222/Kol/2019 for the assessment year