Search: condonation of delay

4 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 10(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 80I6 Section 345 Section 804 Section 139(1)3 Section 1392 Section 260A2 Section 1482 Section 12A2 Exemption2 Addition to Income2

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SHIMLA vs. MS SOLAN DISTRICT TRUCK OPERATORS TRANSPORT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD DARLAGHAT THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT

ITA/3/2020HC Himachal Pradesh27 Aug 2020

Bench: This Court. 2. On 29Th March 2019, The State Of Hp Filed The Objections Under Section 34 Of The Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (After Now Called ‘The Arbitration Act’) Against The Award Of Ld. Arbitrator Announced On 8Th December 2018. Since The Period Of Three Months Expired On 9Th March, Hence The Objections Accompanied An Application Under Section 34 Of The Arbitration Act To Condone The Delay On The Grounds That The Objections Were Filed Within Permissible 30 Days After The Expiry Of The Statutory Period Of Three Months. 1Whether Reporters Of Local Papers May Be Allowed To See The Judgment?

For Appellant: Mr. B.C. Negi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Parvesh Negi

Section 34

10 was filed beyond three months plus 30 days, and no provision of law would empower the Court to condone the delay beyond such 30 days. Therefore, the appellant contends that the learned Single Judge could not have condoned the delay. On the contrary, the contention on behalf of the respondent-State is that the delay

Pr. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SHIMLA vs. HP HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (HIMUDA)

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/35/2019HC Himachal Pradesh22 Dec 2023

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA

For Appellant: Ms. Vandana Kuthiala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Vishal Mohan, Senior Advocate, with

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80Section 80ASection 80I

10) to the assessee. The only contention is that since the original return of income was filed by the asessee beyond the period prescribed in Section 139(1), therefore, the embargo placed by Section 80AC on the entitlement of the assessee to the deduction claimed under Section 80IB of the Act comes into play. Section 139 (4) allows “any person

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. THE TIBETIAN CHILDREN VILLAGE

Accordingly the same are dismissed alongwith pending

ITA/29/2019HC Himachal Pradesh22 Aug 2023

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

For Appellant: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with

Section 12ASection 148Section 260A

5. We may point out that these appeals had initially been filed before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, but the said High Court had returned the same in 2016 directing the Revenue to file them before the Court of competent jurisdiction, and thereafter these appeals were filed in this Court and they were numbered, after condoning the delay