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 80P(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Pune225Mumbai215Chennai174Bangalore145Cochin133Panaji92Kolkata48Ahmedabad44Hyderabad32Raipur30Delhi29Jaipur28Nagpur28Visakhapatnam22Chandigarh20Lucknow18Indore17Karnataka16Surat14Rajkot13Patna4Jabalpur2Calcutta2Jodhpur1Amritsar1Guwahati1Agra1SC1

Key Topics

Section 80P10Section 1488Section 1474Section 2502Section 143(2)2Deduction2TDS2Disallowance2Addition to Income

BRAHTAKAR KRISHI SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,SAHAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JABALPUR

In the result, all the three appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 149/JAB/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sapan Usrethe, Advocate & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

4. The learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal) NFAC was not justified in confirming the action of AO with regard to the deduction of Rs.6,35,489 claimed by the appellant under section 80P of the act without appreciating that in subsequent year it was duly allowed by the AO and also by CPC and hence disallowance in the year

2
Limitation/Time-bar2

BRAHTAKAR KRISHI SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,SAHAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JABALPUR

In the result, all the three appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 151/JAB/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sapan Usrethe, Advocate & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

4. The learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal) NFAC was not justified in confirming the action of AO with regard to the deduction of Rs.6,35,489 claimed by the appellant under section 80P of the act without appreciating that in subsequent year it was duly allowed by the AO and also by CPC and hence disallowance in the year