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 282(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka122Chennai118Mumbai116Jaipur87Amritsar74Delhi64Panaji63Pune55Kolkata55Bangalore35Chandigarh32Hyderabad29Ahmedabad24Surat18Cochin14Cuttack13Indore12Lucknow11Rajkot11Raipur8Varanasi7Agra7Nagpur7Allahabad7Visakhapatnam6Jodhpur5Patna3Calcutta3SC2Guwahati1Rajasthan1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 1473Section 52Section 133(6)2Addition to Income2Natural Justice2Limitation/Time-bar2Condonation of Delay2

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

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

PAPPU KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 5 (4), PATNA

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

ITA 322/PAT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

1 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Pappu Kumar 2. The Registry has pointed out that the appeal is time barred by 295 days. However, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay and contended that actually the appeal is time barred by 282 days. The assessee further contended that appeal was decided by the ld. CIT(Appeals) ex-parte

SATYA NARAYAN SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-6(2), PATNA

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

ITA 574/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Sanjay Awasthiassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Alok Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT
Section 147Section 2(47)Section 250Section 50C

condone the delay and admit this appeal for adjudication. 2 Satya Narayan Singh, AY: 2015-16, 3. In this case, the ld. Assessing Officer is seemed to have passed an order u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act. In this order, the Assessing Officer has assessed capital gains at Rs.1,34,97,643/-. Aggrieved with this case, the assessee approached