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 138clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka104Mumbai102Chennai92Bangalore84Delhi82Ahmedabad73Pune65Kolkata51Calcutta36Hyderabad27Jaipur24Indore19Chandigarh18Kerala17Surat13Visakhapatnam10Lucknow10Rajkot8Cochin7Raipur7Cuttack5Nagpur5Patna5Allahabad3SC3Amritsar3Andhra Pradesh2Jodhpur1Orissa1Rajasthan1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 2504Section 1474Addition to Income4Limitation/Time-bar4Condonation of Delay4Section 1443Section 1392Section 1482Section 36(1)(viia)

KANHAIYA KUMAR,NAWADA vs. ITO, WARD-2(5), BIHARSHARIF

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

ITA 560/PAT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna13 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.560/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay

CHANDAN KUMAR,PATNA vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 260/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Patna
2
Section 143(3)2
Section 143(2)2
Cash Deposit2
13 Feb 2025
AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 260/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Chandan Kumar,……………..…………....……Appellant 2H/33, Near T.V. Tower, Bahadurpur, Housing Colony, Kankarbagh, Patna-800020, Bihar [Pan:Apups3760C] -Vs.- National Faceless Assessment Centre,....Respondent New Delhi Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: February 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: February 13, 2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147

delay is condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, who filed his return of income declaring total income at Rs.11,46,000/-. In this case, the department has credible information that the assessee has made advances to various entities and made investments during F.Y. 2014-15 relevant to A.Y. 2015-16. In order

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR vs. M/S UTTAR BIHAR GRAMIN BANK, MUZAFFARPUR

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

ITA 30/PAT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 250Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(vila)

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law by deleting the disallowance of Rs. 43,67,25,641/- made

RAJ CONSTRUCTION,KATIHAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHAGALPUR

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

ITA 398/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raj Construction Circle – 1(1), C/O Mahadev Ghosh, Bhagalpur, Advocate Vs. Bf-199, Salt Lake City, R.N. Plaza, R.B.S.S Kolkata-700064 Sahay Road, Bhagalpur, Bihar- 812001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajfr6306F Assessee By : Shri Mahadev Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri Mahadev Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar, DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 68

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 03. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal; - “1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC) has erred in passing the order confirming the disallowance of Sundry Creditors of the amount of 2,37,71,018 is arbitrary, unjustified

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KATIHAR vs. BIRENDRA KUMAR SANCHETI, KATIHAR

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

ITA 405/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

138 days and accordingly leading to late submission of scrutiny report.” 1.2 After perusing the same, we are satisfied that the Revenue had a reasonable and sufficient cause and was prevented from filing the instant appeal within the statutory time limit. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The Revenue is in appeal before