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.

17 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 120(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai173Chennai168Delhi128Karnataka123Kolkata97Chandigarh92Pune71Bangalore60Hyderabad59Jaipur54Ahmedabad49Raipur48Calcutta41Cuttack26Cochin18Rajkot18Guwahati17Surat16Visakhapatnam15Indore14Lucknow14Amritsar12Patna11Jodhpur7Nagpur7Panaji7Varanasi6SC6Telangana4Dehradun2Himachal Pradesh1Orissa1Andhra Pradesh1Agra1Jabalpur1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 733Section 1422Section 25016Limitation/Time-bar11Addition to Income6Section 44A5Section 143(3)5Depreciation5Disallowance

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 37/GTY/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

condone the impugned delay attributable to various procedural formalities and compilation of records. The case is now taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. The Revenue's first substantive grievance reads that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting depreciation disallowance of ₹84,86,809/- made by the Assessing Officer in assessment order dated

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

5
Section 56(2)(x)3
ITA 38/GTY/2022[2018-19]Status: Heard
ITAT Guwahati
05 Apr 2023
AY 2018-19

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

condone the impugned delay attributable to various procedural formalities and compilation of records. The case is now taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. The Revenue's first substantive grievance reads that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting depreciation disallowance of ₹84,86,809/- made by the Assessing Officer in assessment order dated

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 39/GTY/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

condone the impugned delay attributable to various procedural formalities and compilation of records. The case is now taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. The Revenue's first substantive grievance reads that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting depreciation disallowance of ₹84,86,809/- made by the Assessing Officer in assessment order dated

ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 43/GTY/2022[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

condone the impugned delay attributable to various procedural formalities and compilation of records. The case is now taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. The Revenue's first substantive grievance reads that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting depreciation disallowance of ₹84,86,809/- made by the Assessing Officer in assessment order dated

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 2/GTY/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

condone the impugned delay attributable to various procedural formalities and compilation of records. The case is now taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. The Revenue's first substantive grievance reads that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting depreciation disallowance of ₹84,86,809/- made by the Assessing Officer in assessment order dated

M/S. ASSAM COMPANY INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, DIBRUGARH

In the result, I.T.A. No.: 104/Gty/2010 for Assessment Year:

ITA 120/GTY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 14Section 250Section 7

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. As in the captioned appeals most of the issues raised by both the parties are common, therefore, as agreed by both the parties, the same are taken up together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 4. Brief facts

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, DIBRUGARH vs. M/S. ASSAM COMPANY INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, I.T.A. No.: 104/Gty/2010 for Assessment Year:

ITA 109/GTY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 14Section 250Section 7

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. As in the captioned appeals most of the issues raised by both the parties are common, therefore, as agreed by both the parties, the same are taken up together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 4. Brief facts

M/S. ASSAM COMPANY INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, DIBRUGARH

In the result, I.T.A. No.: 104/Gty/2010 for Assessment Year:

ITA 123/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 14Section 250Section 7

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. As in the captioned appeals most of the issues raised by both the parties are common, therefore, as agreed by both the parties, the same are taken up together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 4. Brief facts

M/S. ASSAM COMPANY INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, DIBRUGARH

In the result, I.T.A. No.: 104/Gty/2010 for Assessment Year:

ITA 121/GTY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 14Section 250Section 7

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. As in the captioned appeals most of the issues raised by both the parties are common, therefore, as agreed by both the parties, the same are taken up together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 4. Brief facts

ASSAM COMPANY INDIA LTD,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, DIBRUGARH

In the result, I.T.A. No.: 104/Gty/2010 for Assessment Year:

ITA 104/GTY/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 14Section 250Section 7

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. As in the captioned appeals most of the issues raised by both the parties are common, therefore, as agreed by both the parties, the same are taken up together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 4. Brief facts

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2, DIBRUGARH vs. M/S. ASSAM COMPANY LIMITED, KOKATA

In the result, I.T.A. No.: 104/Gty/2010 for Assessment Year:

ITA 183/GTY/2013[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 14Section 250Section 7

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. As in the captioned appeals most of the issues raised by both the parties are common, therefore, as agreed by both the parties, the same are taken up together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 4. Brief facts

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2, DIBRUGARH vs. M/S. ASSAM COMPANY LIMITED, KOKATA

In the result, I.T.A. No.: 104/Gty/2010 for Assessment Year:

ITA 440/GTY/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 14Section 250Section 7

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. As in the captioned appeals most of the issues raised by both the parties are common, therefore, as agreed by both the parties, the same are taken up together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 4. Brief facts

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, DIBRUGARH vs. M/S. ASSAM COMPANY INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, I.T.A. No.: 104/Gty/2010 for Assessment Year:

ITA 108/GTY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 14Section 250Section 7

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. As in the captioned appeals most of the issues raised by both the parties are common, therefore, as agreed by both the parties, the same are taken up together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 4. Brief facts

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2, DIBRUGARH vs. M/S. ASSAM COMPANY LIMITED, KOKATA

In the result, I.T.A. No.: 104/Gty/2010 for Assessment Year:

ITA 12/GTY/2018[1986-87]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 1986-87

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 14Section 250Section 7

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. As in the captioned appeals most of the issues raised by both the parties are common, therefore, as agreed by both the parties, the same are taken up together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 4. Brief facts

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, DIBRUGARH vs. M/S. ASSAM COMPANY INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, I.T.A. No.: 104/Gty/2010 for Assessment Year:

ITA 161/GTY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 14Section 250Section 7

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. As in the captioned appeals most of the issues raised by both the parties are common, therefore, as agreed by both the parties, the same are taken up together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 4. Brief facts

M/S. ASSAM COMPANY INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, DIBRUGARH

In the result, I.T.A. No.: 104/Gty/2010 for Assessment Year:

ITA 119/GTY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 14Section 250Section 7

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. As in the captioned appeals most of the issues raised by both the parties are common, therefore, as agreed by both the parties, the same are taken up together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 4. Brief facts

SOMEN BHATTACHARJEE,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TINSUKIA ASSAM

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

ITA 181/GTY/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati27 Aug 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm Income Tax Officer, Somen Bhattacharjee Ward-1, Tinsukia Assam B/3/11 Northen Park Bansdroni, Sector-3, Tinsukia, Assam Vs. Kolkata-700070, West Bengal Pin-786125 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acapb0292M Assessee By : Shri Prasanjit Das, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kausik Ray, Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri Prasanjit Das, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, DR
Section 56(2)(x)

delay is for Bonafide and genuine reasons and therefore, we condone the same. Somen Bhattacharjee; A.Y. 2018-19 03. We note that the assessment order has been framed by the National e-assessment center, Delhi in which an addition of ₹31,81,000/-was made u/s 56(2)(x) of the Act in respect of difference between the purchase consideration