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 5(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai4,146Mumbai3,999Delhi3,259Kolkata2,189Pune1,852Bangalore1,681Ahmedabad1,494Hyderabad1,228Jaipur968Patna740Surat649Cochin605Chandigarh580Indore558Nagpur521Visakhapatnam451Raipur411Lucknow404Rajkot348Amritsar330Cuttack313Karnataka301Panaji201Agra160Calcutta125Guwahati121Dehradun105Jodhpur98Allahabad82Jabalpur65SC63Ranchi61Telangana48Varanasi37Andhra Pradesh17Rajasthan11Orissa10Kerala7Punjab & Haryana6Himachal 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

2) and/or (2A) for setting aside such award. What follows from this is that the application itself must be within time, and if not within a period of three months, must be accompanied with an application for condonation of delay, provided it is within a further period of 30 days, this Court having made it clear that section 5

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

condonation of delay as under :- “9. The main issue raised by the assessee in this case is that the delay in audit has led to delay in filing of return which had led to his claim of 80IB(10) being disallowed and this had caused genuine hardship to him. It should be noted first that disallowance of any claim will

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

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

2, 3 and 4 raised in ITA no.1 of 5 2020 arise. In addition, according to the Revenue, the following question also arises in these 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

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

2, 3 and 4 raised in ITA no.1 of 5 2020 arise. In addition, according to the Revenue, the following question also arises in these 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