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 57clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai477Mumbai427Delhi414Kolkata262Bangalore230Ahmedabad176Karnataka141Jaipur121Hyderabad115Pune113Chandigarh110Nagpur78Surat54Lucknow48Indore41Calcutta38Panaji38Cochin32Visakhapatnam23Rajkot22Raipur18SC16Cuttack16Patna14Amritsar13Guwahati10Telangana9Jodhpur6Dehradun6Agra6Allahabad5Varanasi5Jabalpur4Rajasthan4Orissa3A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Gauhati1Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

COMNR.OF I.TAX vs. SANDY RESORTS P.LTD

ITA/122/2006HC Orissa23 Feb 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 151

Section 151 CPC is for condonation of 99 days delay in refiling the appeal. MAMTA 2022.06.02 12:57 I atttest

PRINCIPAL COMNR. OF INCOME TAX, SAMBALPUR RANGE vs. M/S. TATA SPONGE IRON LTD.

ITA/96/2022HC Orissa17 Aug 2023

Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Section 18 and explained its significance in the following words: ―22. The significance of Section 18 of the Act can be understood in the light of the above provisions. Section 18 provides for provisional assessment of duty in cases specified in sub-section (1) of the section. Clause (c) of sub-section (1) deals with cases where the importer

NEELACHAL I.NIGAM L. vs. ASST.COMNR.OF I.TAX

ITA/8/2005HC Orissa17 Nov 2021

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

Section 143(1)(a)

57 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters the proceedings before the Deputy Superintendent or the Assistant Collector were vitiated. This position obtains in all the appeals although the type and quality of paper are different. The Central Government merely affirmed the order made by the Collector in each case and did not give any independent reasons for upholding