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.

2 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 268Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka43Kolkata20Chennai10Lucknow10Telangana2Hyderabad2Jaipur2Calcutta2Mumbai1Pune1SC1Indore1

Key Topics

Section 685

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. ALLIANCE GLOBAL SERVICES IT INDIA LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 444/HYD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala &For Respondent: 23-06-2022
Section 268A

condone the delay and proceed to hear the matter on merits. 3. At the outset, the ld. DR brought to our attention that CBDT vide Circular No. 17/2019 dated 8th August 2019 has decided that the Revenue would not prefer any appeal before the Tribunal if the tax effect is less than Rs. 50 lakhs. Therefore, he pleaded that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. TRIDENT POWER PRIVATE LTD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 453/HYD/2023[2013-14]Status: Disposed
ITAT Hyderabad
13 Nov 2024
AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.453/Hyd/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri T. Srinivasa, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mookambikeyan S, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 68

condone the delay of 38 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the case on merits. 4. In this appeal, the Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition