Search: condonation of delay

7 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 195(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 26311 Addition to Income6 Section 143(3)5 Limitation/Time-bar5 Section 80I4 Section 1474 Section 69A4 Condonation of Delay4 Section 148

SANJEEV BATISH,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 723/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Rohit GoelFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT

Section 80Section 80I

195 has held that acceptance of explanation for condonation of delay should be the rule and refusal an exception. The application seeking condonation of delay should not be rejected on hyper technical reason or by taking pedantic view when the stakes are high and / or arguable points of facts and law are involved. Rejecting the application for seeking condonation would

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

ITA 644/CHANDI/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh

SANJEEV BATISH,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

SANJEEV BATISH,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. SHREE BALAJI PROCESSORS, LUDHIANA

SH. SAURABH KAUSHIK,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), CHANDIGARH

BHUP SINGH KOUNDAL,MANDI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD SHIMLA

GULZAR MOHD,MALERKOTLA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

GANGA ACROWOOLS LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. PR,CIT-1, LUDHIANA