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.

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

Sorted by relevance

Chennai4,131Mumbai3,970Delhi3,244Kolkata2,171Pune1,841Bangalore1,676Ahmedabad1,395Hyderabad1,217Jaipur919Patna737Surat633Chandigarh574Indore539Nagpur521Cochin490Visakhapatnam439Raipur412Lucknow392Rajkot332Amritsar326Karnataka301Cuttack301Panaji201Agra157Calcutta111Guwahati108Dehradun103Jodhpur96Allahabad72SC62Jabalpur61Ranchi59Telangana48Varanasi37Andhra Pradesh17Rajasthan11Orissa9Kerala7Punjab & Haryana5Himachal Pradesh5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Gauhati1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1VIKRAMAJIT SEN SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Section 80I6Section 345Section 804Section 139(1)3Section 1392Section 260A2Section 1482Section 12A2Exemption

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

4]. Having regard to the proviso to section 34(3) of the Act, the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 will not apply in regard to petitions under section 34 of the Act. While section 5 of the Limitation Act does not place any outer limit in regard to the period of delay that could be condoned

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

2
Addition to Income2

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

5) provides that “if any person, having furnished a return under sub-section (1) or sub-section (4), discovers any omission or any wrong statement therein, he may furnish a revised return at any time before the end of the relevant assessment year or before the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier.” 4(iv)(a) Consequences of non filing

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

4 appeals: “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances and in law, the order of the Appellate Tribunal is contrary to the evidence and material on record of the case and therefore perverse?” 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

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

Accordingly the same are dismissed alongwith pending

ITA/31/2019HC 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

4 appeals: “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances and in law, the order of the Appellate Tribunal is contrary to the evidence and material on record of the case and therefore perverse?” 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

SHIVA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, the ITA is allowed

ITA/2/2023HC Himachal Pradesh31 Oct 2023

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

For Appellant: Mr. Vishal Mohan, Senior Advocate withFor Respondent: Mr.Vinay Kuthalia, Senior Advocate with
Section 254(2)

condonation of delay, if the delay exceeded period of six months from the end of the month in which the order is passed as per amended Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Ax, 1961. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant sought to contend that the Tribunal had wrongly noted the date of filing the Miscellaneous Application