Search: condonation of delay

7 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 34(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 143(3)8 Section 808 Section 153A6 Section 80I6 Addition to Income4 Condonation of Delay3 Section 144C2 Section 92C2 Section 92B

RAJESH AGGARWAL ,DEHRADUN vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 199/DDN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

condone the delay and admit the appeals of the assessee for adjudication. 2. As identical issues are involved in all these appeals, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. AY: 2011-12 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: That the Order passed

RAJESH AGGARWAL ,DEHRADUN vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

KARAM SAFETY PRIVATE LIMITED,SITARGANJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(5), UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

RAJESH AGGARWAL ,DEHRADUN vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

KARAM SAFETY PRIVATE LIMITED,SITARGANJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(5), UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

KARAM SAFETY PRIVATE LIMITED,UDHAM SINGH NAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(5), UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

SH. SANJAY KUMAR,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), DEHRADUN

SLO AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD.,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

GYANENDRA PANWAR,DEHRADUN vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC BENGALURU, BENGALURU

M/S SUNIL TRADERS,RISHIKESH vs. ITO, W-2(3)(3), ALMORA, ALMORA