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.

7 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 26Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai15Mumbai14Jaipur13Indore13Kolkata7Surat6Bangalore5Cochin5Varanasi3Hyderabad3Raipur3Pune2Chandigarh2Nagpur2Cuttack2Delhi2Amritsar1Ahmedabad1

Key Topics

Section 4017Section 2509Section 201(1)9Section 143(3)8Deduction6TDS6Condonation of Delay6Section 2014Section 194A

SANTANU DAS,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-25(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2582/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

Section 3 of the Limitation Act; 5. Courts are empowered to exercise discretion to condone the delay if sufficient cause had been explained, but that exercise of power is discretionary in nature and may not be exercised even if sufficient cause is established for various factors such as, where there is inordinate delay, negligence and want of due diligence

UNION BANK OF INDIA,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O.,WARD-4(2), BURDWAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

4
Addition to Income4
Limitation/Time-bar4
Section 143(2)3
ITA 322/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Oct 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 194ASection 197A(1)Section 201Section 201(1)

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing. 3. Brief facts (for AY 2014-15) of the case are that the AO notes that the assessee is a Government Bank engaged in banking activities and it takes deposits from customer and against such deposit, the customers earn interest on their deposit. The AO notes that a survey operation

UNION BANK OF INDIA,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O.,WARD-4(2), BURDWAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 323/KOL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Oct 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 194ASection 197A(1)Section 201Section 201(1)

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing. 3. Brief facts (for AY 2014-15) of the case are that the AO notes that the assessee is a Government Bank engaged in banking activities and it takes deposits from customer and against such deposit, the customers earn interest on their deposit. The AO notes that a survey operation

KAZI ZAINAL ABSAR,ASANSOL vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 348/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 194Section 250Section 40

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1) For that on the facts of the case the Ld. CIT (A) was not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs. 6,29,865/- for non deduction of TDS u/s 40(a)(ia), for payments made against interest

SHREYANS OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 8(2),, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2454/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 250Section 263Section 40

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. ITA No. 2454/KOL/2024, AY 2011-12: “1. That the Order passed u/s 250 is bad in law as well as on facts of the case. 2. That the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income

SHREYANS OVERSEAS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 8(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2455/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 250Section 263Section 40

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. ITA No. 2454/KOL/2024, AY 2011-12: “1. That the Order passed u/s 250 is bad in law as well as on facts of the case. 2. That the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income

ARYA ROADWAYS CO.PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 3(3), KOLKATA [NEW ITO, WARD - 12(1), KOLKATA], KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1454/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2010-11 Arya Roadways Co Pvt V/S. Ito Ward-3(3), [New Ltd., Tivoli Court, Block-B, Ito Ward-12(1)] Aayakar Bhavana, 7Th Flat-93, 1C, Ballygunge Circular Road, Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Kolkata-700 019 Square, Kolkata-69 [Pan No.Aaeca 9139 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Brijesh Kr. Singh, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A.K. Singh, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 06-12-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 26-12-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Kolkata’S Order Dated 21.02.2017 Passed In Case No.385/Cit(A)-15/15-16/3(3)/R&T/Kol Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Sides. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Two Substantive Grounds In The Instant Appeal. It Firstly Seeks To Reverse Both The Lower Authorities’ Action Disallowing / Adding Its Freight Charges Of ₹11,68,46,218/- As Well As Loading / Unloading Charges Of ₹10,87,385/- Paid To Various Parties On

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 192Section 201(1)Section 40

section 201(1) are not fully satisfied. Hence, disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) by AO ae justified in respect of payments made to these 3 parties. Now coming to the 4th party, it was noticed that R.M. Logistics is a proprietory concern of Saswata Nayak. In Form 26A, it was mentioned that this party had filed return of income