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 43(6)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai557Delhi469Mumbai357Kolkata230Hyderabad226Bangalore176Jaipur170Ahmedabad161Pune147Karnataka145Chandigarh134Nagpur67Amritsar46Cuttack41Raipur39Lucknow38Indore38Calcutta37Visakhapatnam33Surat32Cochin26SC24Guwahati16Rajkot15Patna12Varanasi12Telangana10Allahabad9Dehradun5Rajasthan5Jodhpur5Panaji4Orissa4Himachal Pradesh1Jabalpur1Andhra Pradesh1Agra1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 139(1)7Section 1546Disallowance5Section 143(1)(a)4Section 114Section 36(1)(va)3Condonation of Delay3Addition to Income3Limitation/Time-bar

DUSHKAL GO SEWA SAMITI,SUMERPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), JODHPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 9/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2017-18
Section 11Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

section 119(2)(b) General Of Income Tax should be construed liberally, particularly in matters of (Bombay High Court) entertaining application seeking condonation of delay. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other

DUSHKAL GO SEWA SAMITI,SUMERPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), JODHPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

3
Section 139(9)2
Section 143(1)2
Section 2502
ITA 5/JODH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2018-19
Section 11Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

section 119(2)(b) General Of Income Tax should be construed liberally, particularly in matters of (Bombay High Court) entertaining application seeking condonation of delay. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other

COUNTRY ART AND CRAFT LLP,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 85/JODH/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur08 Nov 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: ShriRajendra Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.M. Joshi, JCIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)

delay of 22 days in filing the appeal by the assessee was beyond its control. Therefore the same is condoned and the appeal is admitted. 6. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal. That the appellate order dt.30.07.2021as passed by the CIT(A), 1. National Faceless Appeal Center, Delhi in the appellants case

M/S. PROGRESSIVE AND POPULAR MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHITTORGARH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, CHITTORGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 96/JODH/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur08 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.95 & 96/Jodh/2021 (यनिाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2018-2019 & 2019-2020)

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.M.Joshi, JCIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43

6. At the outset, it is observed that there is a delay of 73 days in filing both the appeals. In this regard, the assessee circumstances, both the appeals could not file within the time. Ld. AR of the assessee also drew our attention to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land acquisition

M/S. PROGRESSIVE AND POPULAR MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHITTORGARH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, CHITTORGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 95/JODH/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur08 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.95 & 96/Jodh/2021 (यनिाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2018-2019 & 2019-2020)

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.M.Joshi, JCIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43

6. At the outset, it is observed that there is a delay of 73 days in filing both the appeals. In this regard, the assessee circumstances, both the appeals could not file within the time. Ld. AR of the assessee also drew our attention to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land acquisition