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.

4 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 90clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai631Mumbai539Delhi388Kolkata340Bangalore219Hyderabad213Ahmedabad182Karnataka128Jaipur125Pune85Surat82Raipur77Chandigarh69Nagpur59Indore56Amritsar52Lucknow49Cochin45Calcutta41Rajkot32Visakhapatnam31Patna23SC19Cuttack18Kerala17Allahabad14Jodhpur12Varanasi11Agra9Jabalpur8Guwahati7Telangana5Panaji4Dehradun4Ranchi3Andhra Pradesh2Rajasthan2Orissa1Himachal Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1

Key Topics

Section 246A(1)(b)4Section 92C2Section 1442Transfer Pricing2

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 238/DDN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun11 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shr Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.238/Ddn/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 बनाम Gyanendra Panwar, Assistant Director Of Income Nanda Devi Enclave, Badripur, Vs. Tax, Cpc,Ito,Ward 1(3)(4), Dehradun-248005, Uttarakhand. Aaykar Bhawan, 16, Civil Lines, Pan No.Adipp2853R Near Iit Roorkee, Uttarakhand. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

90 years was suffering from cancer of ovary during the period and had undergone treatment in various hospitals from time to time. Unfortunately, she could not survive and passed away on 25.06.2025. In fact, she was even admitted to Himalayan Hospital, Cancer Research Institute, Jolly Grant but doctors could not save her due to her old age and advance stage

SHRI ASHWANI GARG,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, W-1(3)(1), HARDWAR, HARDWAR

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

ITA 57/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun02 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara(Through Video Conferencing) Ashwani Garg, Vs. Ito, Plot No. 106-106A, Sector- Ward-1(3)(1), 6A, Sidcul, Haridwar, Haridwar Uttarakhand (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Alcpg7518A Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/04/2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 145(3)Section 69A

delay is hereby condoned and appeal of the assessee is admitted and taken up for adjudication. 3. The first issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the Learned NFAC was justified in upholding the addition of Rs 21,90,500/- made under section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, DEHRADUN vs. BG EXPLORATION, MUMBAI

ITA 107/DDN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 246A(1)(b)Section 92C

90,50,35,760/- and Rs.9,61,7283,910/-; assessment year-wise, respectively. The Assessing Officer thereafter made section 92CA reference(s) to the Transfer Pricing Officer “TPO” in light of the fact that it had declared its international transaction with related parties in both these assessment years. And that the said latter authority passed his identical orders on 29th

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, DEHRADUN vs. BG EXPLORATION PRODUCDTION INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 105/DDN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 246A(1)(b)Section 92C

90,50,35,760/- and Rs.9,61,7283,910/-; assessment year-wise, respectively. The Assessing Officer thereafter made section 92CA reference(s) to the Transfer Pricing Officer “TPO” in light of the fact that it had declared its international transaction with related parties in both these assessment years. And that the said latter authority passed his identical orders on 29th