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.

3 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 168clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka111Mumbai100Bangalore62Pune58Chennai55Delhi47Calcutta37Jaipur35Ahmedabad33Kolkata29Cochin25Cuttack14Chandigarh14Surat12Hyderabad10Panaji5Guwahati5Indore4Lucknow3Rajasthan2Nagpur2Jabalpur2Jodhpur2Amritsar2Visakhapatnam1Orissa1SC1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)4Section 40A(3)3Addition to Income3Limitation/Time-bar3Condonation of Delay3Section 1472

PURNAGIRI RICE MILLS,SHAHJAHANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SHAHJAHANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 251/LKW/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Nov 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharyआयकर अपील सं/ Ita No.251/Lkw/2017 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2007-08 Purnagiri Rice Mills, V. Income Tax Officer Meeran Pur Katra, Range-1(5), Shahajhanpur-242301. Shahajhanpur-242301. Pan:Aahfp6663R अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant By: Shri Saurabh Gupta, Ca प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent By: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. Cit(Dr) सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28 10 2025 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date Of 26 11 2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing on merits. 5. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that in this case, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, for short) on 24.12.2009, assessing total income at Rs.46,460/-. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer (AO) re- opened the assessment after obtaining

SHIV SWAMI VERMA,BARABANKI vs. ITO-5(5), BARABANKI-1

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 362/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Shiv Swami Verma V. The Income Tax Officer 5(5) Village Muhari Purwa Barabanki Faizabad Road Paisar Dehat, Barabanki Tan/Pan:Aenpv8762R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Prashant Kr. Verma, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 12 09 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 09 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Prashant Kr. Verma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

section 69A of the Act. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC. However, the appeal before the NFAC came to be dismissed. 4. Now, the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the action of the NFAC by raising the following grounds of appeal: 01. Because the Ld. CIT (A) has failed to know about the facts

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, FAIZABAD vs. SMT. SARITA NAINWANI, PROP. M/S. BHOLA PHARMA, FAIZABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 36/LKW/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2011-12 The Dy. Cit V. Smt. Sarita Nainwani Circle, Faizabad Prop. M/S Bhola Pharma 3/2/18, Mukeri Tola Faizabad Tan/Pan:Ahtpn1830B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Smt. Sarita Nainwani V. The Income Tax Officer-Ii Prop. M/S Bhola Pharma Faizabad 3/2/18, Mukeri Tola Faizabad Tan/Pan:Ahtpn1830B (Appellant) (Respondent) Department By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Assessee By : Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Date Of Hearing: 25 07 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 17 08 2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

condone the delay. 4. The Revenue has raised the following Grounds of Appeal: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.1,76,12,585/- ignoring the facts brought out by the Assessing Officer that the assessee has made cash payments to parties on a regular basis, thus violating the provisions