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 54Fclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai68Mumbai38Bangalore34Hyderabad28Indore25Delhi19Jaipur17Kolkata13Pune13Ahmedabad12Lucknow7Patna7Visakhapatnam5Chandigarh4Calcutta3Cuttack3Nagpur2Cochin2Surat2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Amritsar1Agra1Punjab & Haryana1Rajkot1SC1

Key Topics

Section 26312Section 54F9Section 143(3)3Limitation/Time-bar3Long Term Capital Gains2Exemption2Deduction2Addition to Income2

SANGRAM KESHARI SAMANTARAY,BHUBANESWAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, BHUBANESWAR

ITA 12/CTK/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Oct 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri D.Parida/C.Parida, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

condone the delay of 224 days in filing the present appeal and the appeal is heard on merits. 4. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. That the order passed by the Learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Bhubaneswar u/s 263 of the LT. Act, 1961 is excessive, arbitrary and bad in law. 2. That

KELLA TRADING COMPANY (HUF),KORAPUT vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 92/CTK/2021[2016-17]Status: Disposed
ITAT Cuttack
15 Nov 2022
AY 2016-17

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2016-17 Kella Kella Trading Trading Company Company Vs. Pr. Cit, Sambalpur Pr. Cit, Sambalpur (Huf), Kella Street, Jeypore, (Huf), Kella Street, Jeypore, Koraput-764001 764001 Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aamhk 1172 R (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C.Sethi, Ar P.C.Sethi, Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit , Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/11 11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11 11/2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Sethi, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54F

condone the delay of 113 days and admit the appeal for hearing. 5. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee, an HUF had filed its return of income by disclosing the long term capital gains claiming the benefit of deduction u/s.54F of the Act in respect of development agreement entered into by the assessee with builder M/s. Odyssa

LAXMINARAYAN DASH,BHUBANESWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 521/CTK/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack30 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.521 /Ctk/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Laxminarayan Das Laxminarayan Das Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Income Tax Officer, Ward Plot No.575-C, C, 3(3), Bhubaneswar Hubaneswar Behera Sahi Nayapali Bhubaneswar, 751012 , 751012 Pan/Gir No. No.Accpd 0726 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By Assessee By : S/Shri P.K.Misahra & B.N.Behera B.N.Behera, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/12/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/12/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated 22/03/2024 In Appeal No.Cit(A),Bhuban Cit(A),Bhubaneswar- 2/10236/2018-19 19 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Shri B.N.Behera B.N.Behera & P.K.Mishra, Ld Ars Appeared For Appeared For The Assessee & Shri S.C.Mohanty S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: S/Shri P.K.Misahra and B.N.BeheraFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 54F

delay of 189 days in filing of appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 5. It was submitted by the ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has simply dismissed the appeal only because the assessee did not comply to the notices issued by him in limine without adjudication of the issues arising in the appeal