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 12(1)(ac)clear

Sorted by relevance

Hyderabad146Mumbai114Karnataka109Pune106Chennai100Kolkata85Ahmedabad80Delhi68Chandigarh61Jaipur51Calcutta34Amritsar31Bangalore27Surat27Rajkot21Indore9SC9Patna5Panaji4Nagpur4Cochin4Agra3Rajasthan3Visakhapatnam3Orissa2Jabalpur2Guwahati2Raipur2Telangana2Lucknow2Jodhpur2Dehradun1Himachal Pradesh1Cuttack1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1Andhra Pradesh1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 1476Section 142(1)5Limitation/Time-bar4Section 143(3)3Reassessment3Addition to Income3Natural Justice3Section 2502Section 271A

M/S MANISH FINLEASE (P) LTD,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), PATNA

ITA 25/PAT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 68
2
Section 272A(1)(d)2
Section 271F2
Section 1482

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal of the assessee on merits. P a g e 1 | 71 Assessment Year : 2010 -2011 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal” “1. For that the CIT(A) has erred in affirming the order of the Assessing Officer passed u/s.143(3)/147 wherein the Assessing Officer has assessed

KARAM AGRAMI AMAN AUR MAITRI SANSTAN,RANCHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), PATNA, PATNA

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 505/PAT/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Patna13 Feb 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Hon’Ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Patna For Rejection Of Registration Under Section 12Ab(1)(B)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Said Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Patna Was Passed & Received On The Same Date By Mail. Therefore, The Appeal Should Have Been Instituted Within 60 Days From Receipt Of Such Order I.E., On Or Before 04.05.2024. I.T.A. No. 505/Pat/2024 Karam Agrami Aman Aur Maitri Sanstan

Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

delay is hereby condoned and this appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The present appeal emanates from order dated 02.03.2024, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Patna, [hereafter ‘the Ld. CIT(E)’], u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter ‘the Act’). 2.1 In this case, the assessee had filed an application

SRIRAM ENTERPRISES,PATNA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 76/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 76/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Sriram Enterprises,………………………..........Appellant C/O. Nirmal & Associates, Nepali Kothi, Opposite Gasoline Petrol Pump, Boring Road, Patna-800001 [Pan:Aarfs8853J] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Patna,…………………………………..……………..Respondent, Bihar-800001 Appearances By: Shri Nishant Maitin, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Md. A.H. Chowdhary, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 5Th March, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 8Th, 2024 O R D E R

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 263

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of Government Civil Contractor & Sub-contractor and involved in the infrastructure development and maintenance such as roads, bridges, railways tunnels, etc. Income of Rs.4,25,44,130/- declared

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 182/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271ASection 271FSection 272A(1)(d)

12. Without prejudice to our ground that no addition should be made as, your appellant submits that the learned AO ought to have considered and accepted the fact in the case. 13. The issue which needs adjudication is that where no notice under section 143(2) of the Act has been issued to assessee, can the assessment be completed under

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 181/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271ASection 271FSection 272A(1)(d)

12. Without prejudice to our ground that no addition should be made as, your appellant submits that the learned AO ought to have considered and accepted the fact in the case. 13. The issue which needs adjudication is that where no notice under section 143(2) of the Act has been issued to assessee, can the assessment be completed under