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.

6 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 271A(1)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai58Karnataka21Ahmedabad11Delhi11Bangalore8Pune7Kolkata7Lucknow6Mumbai6Jaipur5Surat5Visakhapatnam3Guwahati3Raipur3SC2Cochin1Indore1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 2637Section 271(1)(b)6Section 271A6Section 271B6Section 271(1)(c)6Condonation of Delay4Section 143(3)3Section 120(4)(b)3Section 250

CROMPTON GREAVES LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT -6, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company in ITA no

ITA 2836/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar"ी शैल" कुमार यादव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी "ी रिमत कोचर, लेखाकार सद"य के सम" । आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1994/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2836/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Crompton Greaves बनाम/ Cit – 6,Mumbai, Ltd.,6Th Floor, C.G. House, 5Th Floor, V. Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 030. M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacc3840K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pradeep N. Kapasi Revenue By : Shri C.W. Angolkar सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 29-10-2015 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01-02-2016

For Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay was computed in a reasonable and prudent manner based on past experience of the company and the company has a policy to write back the unused amounts and offer the same for taxation on expiry of the relevant period for claim of damages and there is no leakage of revenue as the company is being taxed at a flat

3
Penalty3
Limitation/Time-bar3

ADDL CIT R G 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD. ), MUMBAI

ITA 6772/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2

271A,section 271J or section 272A; or (b) an order passed by an Assessing Officer under clause (c) of section 158BC, in respect of search initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets requisitioned under section 132A, after the 30th day of June, 1995, but before the 1st day of January, 1997; or an order

BHAVESH GHANSHYAM ADVANI,MUMBAI vs. CIT(INTL TAX)-1,, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5808/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade, CIT-DR

condoned the delay with a direction to the concerned Commissioner for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. 6. Against this order of ITAT, Revenue filed Miscellaneous Application (M.A.) vide M.A. No. 126/Mum/2019 under section 254(2) of the Act. In its M.A., Department raised the ground that order passed under section 119(2)(b) of the Act is not appealable

FEMINA CONCEPT MARKETING & RETAIL TRADING (TEXTILES) CO P LIMITED,THANE vs. WARD 5(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8082/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Jagadish

For Appellant: Ms. Simran DhawanFor Respondent: Shri Abi Rama Karthikeyan, SR. DR
Section 249Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 271B

D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The assessee has filed the present appeals against the separate impugned orders of even date 29/09/2025, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], which ITAs No.8080, 8081 & 8082/Mum/2025 (A.Ys

FEMINA CONCEPT MARKETING AND RETAIL TRADING (TEXTILES) CO P LIMITED,THANE vs. WARD 5(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8081/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Jagadish

For Appellant: Ms. Simran DhawanFor Respondent: Shri Abi Rama Karthikeyan, SR. DR
Section 249Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 271B

D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The assessee has filed the present appeals against the separate impugned orders of even date 29/09/2025, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], which ITAs No.8080, 8081 & 8082/Mum/2025 (A.Ys

FEMINA CONCEPT MARKETING AND RETAIL TRADING (TEXTILES) CO P LIMITED,THANE vs. WARD 5(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8080/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Jagadish

For Appellant: Ms. Simran DhawanFor Respondent: Shri Abi Rama Karthikeyan, SR. DR
Section 249Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 271B

D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The assessee has filed the present appeals against the separate impugned orders of even date 29/09/2025, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], which ITAs No.8080, 8081 & 8082/Mum/2025 (A.Ys