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.

75 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 8clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,199Chennai3,159Delhi2,570Kolkata1,661Pune1,517Bangalore1,435Ahmedabad1,041Hyderabad1,039Jaipur771Patna672Surat512Chandigarh467Nagpur405Raipur396Indore378Visakhapatnam351Lucknow309Cochin308Amritsar296Karnataka274Rajkot260Cuttack193Panaji150Agra104Dehradun85Guwahati76Calcutta75Jodhpur61SC58Ranchi47Telangana44Allahabad41Jabalpur40Varanasi31Orissa10Andhra Pradesh9Rajasthan9Kerala7Punjab & Haryana5Himachal 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 260A36Section 26324Condonation of Delay21Limitation/Time-bar18Addition to Income17Section 143(3)12Section 12A10Section 688Section 43B

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

condone the delay for more than one year and three months and the applications being beyond the prescribed period were not entertained. 7 8. Notwithstanding the aforesaid, as and by way of a passing remark he had observed by placing reliance on Section

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

ITAT/62/2020HC Calcutta08 Feb 2021

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

Showing 1–20 of 75 · Page 1 of 4

7
Section 153A5
Section 53A5
Deduction5
For Respondent: Mr. Atarup Banerjee
Section 5

condonation of delay is made through Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is dismissed and as a 8 consequence

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

delay having been condoned by the Court, the appeal should therefore be deemed to have been filed within the time allowed by law. Thus, by applying the deeming fiction to the facts of the case, we have to necessarily hold that the appeal filed by the revenue before this Court for all purposes should be treated to have been

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

delay having been condoned by the Court, the appeal should therefore be deemed to have been filed within the time allowed by law. Thus, by applying the deeming fiction to the facts of the case, we have to necessarily hold that the appeal filed by the revenue before this Court for all purposes should be treated to have been

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

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 1963 Act) for condoning the delay in filing the Review Application being RVW 2 of 2022. The Review Application arises out of judgment and order dated 19th August, 2019 passed in WP.CT 153 of 2019 by which a judicial review in the form of a writ petition

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, and sought permission from the Central Board of Direct Taxes, before filing the revised returns beyond the statutory period of March 31, 2018. The appellants having belatedly filed their revised returns on November 27, 2018, which was beyond the due date of March 31, 2018 for the assessment year 2016-17, the assessment could only be done

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-2, KOLKATA vs. LONG VIEW TEA CO. LTD.

ITAT/237/2018HC Calcutta03 Feb 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : February 3, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. Asok Bhowmik, Adv. … For The Appellant Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Soumya Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Anand Agarwal, Adv. ..For The Respondent The Court : We Have Heard Mr. Asok Bhowmik, Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For The Appellant/Revenue & Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Counsel Duly Assisted By Mr. Soumya Kejriwal & Mr. Anand Agarwal, Learned Counsel For The Respondent/Assessee.

Section 260ASection 263

8 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE IA NO.GA/2/2018 (Old No. GA/2110/2018) In ITAT/237/2018 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – 2, KOLKATA VS. M/S. LONG VIEW TEA CO. LTD. IA NO.GA/1/2018 (Old No. GA/2109/2018) In ITAT/237/2018 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – 2, KOLKATA VS. M/S. LONG VIEW TEA CO. LTD. BEFORE

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

KPC MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), KOL-1

ITAT/108/2015HC Calcutta19 Mar 2025

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

Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)

delay was condoned. Thereafter, the review applications were taken up for consideration and it was found that since a connected appeal arising out of the same order passed by the learned Tribunal was already admitted, the three other appeals could not have been dismissed on the ground that no substantial question of law arises and this, in the opinion

KPC MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), KOL-1

ITAT/107/2015HC Calcutta19 Mar 2025

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

Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)

delay was condoned. Thereafter, the review applications were taken up for consideration and it was found that since a connected appeal arising out of the same order passed by the learned Tribunal was already admitted, the three other appeals could not have been dismissed on the ground that no substantial question of law arises and this, in the opinion

KPC MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) KOL-1

ITAT/105/2015HC Calcutta19 Mar 2025

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

Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)

delay was condoned. Thereafter, the review applications were taken up for consideration and it was found that since a connected appeal arising out of the same order passed by the learned Tribunal was already admitted, the three other appeals could not have been dismissed on the ground that no substantial question of law arises and this, in the opinion

KALI PADIP CHAUDHARI FOUNDATION vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), KOL-1

ITA/21/2015HC Calcutta19 Mar 2025

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

Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)

delay was condoned. Thereafter, the review applications were taken up for consideration and it was found that since a connected appeal arising out of the same order passed by the learned Tribunal was already admitted, the three other appeals could not have been dismissed on the ground that no substantial question of law arises and this, in the opinion

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. M/S. DUNLOP INDIA LTD

ITAT/170/2021HC Calcutta25 Jan 2022

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

For Appellant: Mr. P. B. Bhowmik, AdvFor Respondent: None appears
Section 260A

delay in filing this appeal is condoned. The application, IA NO.GA/1/2021 stands disposed of accordingly. RE: ITAT/170/2021 This appeal by the revenue filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (the Act, in brevity) is directed against the order dated 31.7.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA Nos.621

MA/S SKYSCRAPER PROJECTS PVT LTD. vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(2), KOLKATA

ITAT/141/2025HC Calcutta28 Jul 2025

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

For Appellant: Mr. Anil Kumar Dugar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Advocate
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 43B

condone delay application, GA 1 of 2025, is allowed. The issue involved in the instant case is whether the learned Tribunal was justified in setting aside the order passed by the Appellate authority namely, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal - 4), Kolkata [CIT(A)] and remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer to consider whether addition is required to be made

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

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

ITAT/218/2023HC Calcutta16 Oct 2023

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

Section 260A

condonation of delay is allowed. This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 19.08.2020 2 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Kolkata in I.T.A. No.2067/Kol/2019 for the assessment year 2012-13. The respondent has raised the following substantial questions of law :- i) Whether

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA vs. AMBUJA CEMENT EASTERN LIMITED

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

ITAT/376/2017HC Calcutta11 Apr 2022

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

Section 260A

condonation of delay being IA No. GA/1/2017 (Old No. GA/3676/2017) is allowed. Re : ITAT/376/2017 This appeal by the revenue filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated 16th November, 2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Kolkata in ITA/2109/Kol/2013 for the assessment year 2005-06. The revenue

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX 4, KOLKATA vs. INTERNATIONAL SEAPORTS (HALDIA) PVT LTD

Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed

ITAT/421/2016HC Calcutta01 Aug 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : August 01, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv., ….For Appellant Ga/1/2016 (Old No. Ga/3475/2016) The Court : There Is A Delay Of 63 Days In Filing The Appeal. Affidavit-Of-Service Has Been Filed By The Appellant On 5Th July, 2017 Stating That The Notice Sent By Registered Post With Acknowledgement Due Has Been Served Upon The Respondent/Assessee On 29Th October, 2016. Despite Service Of Notice Respondent Did Not Appear. In Any Event, The Delay Is Only 63 Days And, Therefore, We Exercise Our Discretion To Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal. Accordingly, The Application For Condonation Of Delay Is Allowed.

Section 260A

condonation of delay is allowed. ITAT/421/2016 This appeal by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against an order dated 28th January 2016 passed by the Income Tax 2 Appellate Tribunal “D” Bench (Tribunal) in ITA No.1194/Kol/2010 for the assessment year 2004-05. The revenue has raised the following substantial question

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S TECHNO TRACOM PVT LTD

ITAT/67/2023HC Calcutta27 Mar 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 27Th March, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. ...For The Appellant Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv. Mr. Anil Dugar, Adv. ...For The Respondent. The Court : There Is A Delay Of 168 Days In Filing The Appeal. We Have Heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, Learned Counsel For The Appellant & Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Counsel For The Respondent & Perused The Averments Set Out In The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Application For Condonation. We Find Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Not Preferring The Appeal Within The Period Of Limitation.

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154ASection 260ASection 263Section 68

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 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 18th April, 2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA No.205/Kol/2021 for the assessment year 2009-10. The revenue has raised

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