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.

14 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 206C(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Raipur39Chennai38Pune28Delhi14Cochin13Kolkata12Panaji10Rajkot9Bangalore8Dehradun8Jodhpur5Jaipur4Mumbai4Indore3Amritsar3Hyderabad3Lucknow1Ahmedabad1Cuttack1

Key Topics

Section 234E72Section 206C26TDS12Section 200A8Deduction8Section 200(3)6Penalty5Section 143(3)4Section 200A(1)4

W SERVE TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1027/DEL/2020[2015-16 24Q, (Q-1)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. M. Baranwal, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

delay in filing of TDS statements. In this sense, insertion of Clause (c) to section 200A( 1), is only an addendum to the section to provide for the machinery provision to compute the fee payable u/s 234E at the time of processing of TDS statement and the same is enabling for processes in nature. This is very much evident

W SERVE TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

Section 10A2
Section 92C2
Transfer Pricing2

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1040/DEL/2020[2013-14 (26Q-Q-2)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. M. Baranwal, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

delay in filing of TDS statements. In this sense, insertion of Clause (c) to section 200A( 1), is only an addendum to the section to provide for the machinery provision to compute the fee payable u/s 234E at the time of processing of TDS statement and the same is enabling for processes in nature. This is very much evident

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COLLECTORATE,BIJNOR vs. ITO (TDS), MORADABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7985/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7985/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम The District Magistrate Collectorate, Ito (Tds), Vs. Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh. Moradabad. Pan No. Lkndo6243G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 206Section 206C

1. “BECAUSE, or. the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A), confirming the order of ITO (TDS) u/s 206C (6A) of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable and bad in law since the instant assessee is not a “person” for the purpose of section 206C(6C) of the Income

MS MINING OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY,PANIPAT vs. ITO WARD (TDS), KARNAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2010-11 partly allowed

ITA 5736/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 206C

206C(6A) and 206(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 08.03.207 by the Assessing Officer, ITO (TDS), Karnal (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. At the outset, the appeal for AY 2010-11 is delayed by 240 days; appeal for AY 2011-12 is delayed by 304 days and appeal

MS MINING OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY,PANIPAT vs. ITO WARD (TDS), KARNAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2010-11 partly allowed

ITA 5738/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 206C

206C(6A) and 206(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 08.03.207 by the Assessing Officer, ITO (TDS), Karnal (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. At the outset, the appeal for AY 2010-11 is delayed by 240 days; appeal for AY 2011-12 is delayed by 304 days and appeal

MS MINING OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY,PANIPAT vs. ITO WARD (TDS), KARNAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2010-11 partly allowed

ITA 5737/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 206C

206C(6A) and 206(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 08.03.207 by the Assessing Officer, ITO (TDS), Karnal (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. At the outset, the appeal for AY 2010-11 is delayed by 240 days; appeal for AY 2011-12 is delayed by 304 days and appeal

DCIT CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI vs. CANON INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, to sum up and conclude:

ITA 1038/DEL/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Basanta, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 254Section 92C

delay is therefore is condoned. The solitary ground raised by the assessee in the cross objection read as under: “That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Respondent should be allowed interest u/s 244A of the Act on refund and while computing such interest, the foreign tax credit should be kept

CANON INDIA PVT. LTD,GURUGRAM vs. NEAC, DELHI

In the result, to sum up and conclude:

ITA 585/DEL/2021[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Basanta, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 254Section 92C

delay is therefore is condoned. The solitary ground raised by the assessee in the cross objection read as under: “That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Respondent should be allowed interest u/s 244A of the Act on refund and while computing such interest, the foreign tax credit should be kept

DREAM DESIGN AND DISPLAY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 7(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the captioned appeals are allowed

ITA 637/DEL/2024[2013-14 (24Q, Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

1) New Delhi 4. 2013-14 -do- -do- (24Q, Q3) 5. 2013-14 -do- -do- (24Q, Q2) 6. -do- -do- -do- Appellant by: Written Submissions Respondent by: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 09 10 2024 Date of pronouncement: 11 10 2024 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: All the six captioned appeals

DREAM DESIGH AND DISPLAY INDIA PVT. LTD.,,GREATER NOIDA vs. DCIT/TDS/CPC, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the captioned appeals are allowed

ITA 634/DEL/2024[A.Y-2013-14 (Quarter-4 TDS Statement in Form 26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

1) New Delhi 4. 2013-14 -do- -do- (24Q, Q3) 5. 2013-14 -do- -do- (24Q, Q2) 6. -do- -do- -do- Appellant by: Written Submissions Respondent by: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 09 10 2024 Date of pronouncement: 11 10 2024 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: All the six captioned appeals

DREAM DESIGN AND DISPLAY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,UTTAR PRADESH vs. DCIT CIRCLE 7(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the captioned appeals are allowed

ITA 636/DEL/2024[2013-14 (24Q, Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

1) New Delhi 4. 2013-14 -do- -do- (24Q, Q3) 5. 2013-14 -do- -do- (24Q, Q2) 6. -do- -do- -do- Appellant by: Written Submissions Respondent by: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 09 10 2024 Date of pronouncement: 11 10 2024 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: All the six captioned appeals

DREAN DESIGN AND DISPLAY INDIA PVT. LTD.,GREATER NOIDA vs. DCIT/TDS/CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the captioned appeals are allowed

ITA 635/DEL/2024[2013-14 (26Q, Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

1) New Delhi 4. 2013-14 -do- -do- (24Q, Q3) 5. 2013-14 -do- -do- (24Q, Q2) 6. -do- -do- -do- Appellant by: Written Submissions Respondent by: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 09 10 2024 Date of pronouncement: 11 10 2024 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: All the six captioned appeals

DREAM DESIGN AND DISPLAY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 7(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the captioned appeals are allowed

ITA 639/DEL/2024[2013-12 (24Q, Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

1) New Delhi 4. 2013-14 -do- -do- (24Q, Q3) 5. 2013-14 -do- -do- (24Q, Q2) 6. -do- -do- -do- Appellant by: Written Submissions Respondent by: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 09 10 2024 Date of pronouncement: 11 10 2024 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: All the six captioned appeals

DREAM DESIGN AND DISPLAY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA vs. DCIT CRICLE 7(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the captioned appeals are allowed

ITA 638/DEL/2024[2013-14(24Q, Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

1) New Delhi 4. 2013-14 -do- -do- (24Q, Q3) 5. 2013-14 -do- -do- (24Q, Q2) 6. -do- -do- -do- Appellant by: Written Submissions Respondent by: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 09 10 2024 Date of pronouncement: 11 10 2024 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: All the six captioned appeals