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.

3 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 271Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai87Cochin41Jaipur29Pune24Hyderabad22Karnataka21Delhi19Bangalore17Mumbai16Lucknow16Kolkata16Ahmedabad14Amritsar12Visakhapatnam9Indore9Guwahati7Rajkot6Raipur4Allahabad4Chandigarh3Patna3Jabalpur2SC1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 271B12Section 44A3Penalty3Section 2742Section 272

YASHPAL MEHTA,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-6(5), LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 805/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Sept 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 27ISection 44A

condone the delay by taking a liberal approach and considering the principle of natural justice. Accordingly the appeal of the assessee is admitted. 5. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: 1. That the order announced is bad and against the facts and law of the case. 2. That a request for adjournment was made before the learned

CHITVAN AGGARWAL,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-5(1), LUDHIANA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1331/CHANDI/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Sainiassessment Year: 2015-16 Chitvan Aggarwal Vs. The Ito Prop. M/S Bhushan Impex, W-5(1), Ludhiana 17, Beri Mark, Punjab Vishwakarma Chowk, Gill Road, Ludhiana, Punjab

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal,CAFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta, Sr. DR
Section 2Section 27Section 271BSection 274Section 44A

271B of the Act and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified. The reliance was placed on the various case laws: • P. Senthil Kumar Vs. Pr. CIT-5 Chennai dt. 18/12/2018 in Tax Case Appeal No. 604 of 2018 (Madras HC) • Shri. T.T. Kuruvilla Vs. The Asst. CIT, C-1, Alappuzha dt. 22/01/2019 in ITA No. 504/Coch/2018(ITAT

M/S THAKUR PRE-PREEKSHA COACHING & TRAINING SANSTHAN,KANGRA vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), SOLAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1371/CHANDI/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit AggarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh
Section 10Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 250(6)Section 271BSection 44

delay is condoned. 4. The penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- under section 271B has been levied ex-parte by the Assessing