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 73clear

Sorted by relevance

Patna484Chennai466Mumbai401Bangalore307Delhi260Kolkata222Pune144Karnataka131Ahmedabad123Chandigarh122Hyderabad108Jaipur103Visakhapatnam75Surat48Amritsar47Calcutta46Indore44Lucknow31Cochin27Rajkot21Cuttack21Dehradun20Nagpur19Guwahati14Raipur13SC13Panaji12Agra12Telangana11Allahabad8Varanasi6Jabalpur4Orissa3Rajasthan3Andhra Pradesh2Jodhpur2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 52

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. M/S SHRI RAMDOOT PRASAD SEWA SAMITI

ITA/62/2020HC Rajasthan08 Feb 2022

Bench: AKIL KURESHI,SUDESH BANSAL

For Respondent: Mr. Atarup Banerjee
Section 5

Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condonation of delay in filing the first appeal was supported by a medical certificate issued by a registered medical practitioner bearing the registration number of the said medical practitioner. It has also been contended that a certificate issued by a medical practitioner is generally taken into consideration until and unless there

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED

ITA/153/2019HC Rajasthan08 Nov 2021

Bench: AKIL KURESHI,REKHA BORANA

delay is, therefore, condoned. Since the appellants are either persons in whose favor permits were granted by the Regional Transport Authority, or in whose favor the permits were transferred later, they are undoubtedly aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge. We see no reason, therefore, to deny them leave to prefer an appeal against the order passed

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SKYWAYS INDUSTRIAL ESTATE COMPANY (P) LTD.

ITA/82/2020HC Rajasthan14 Feb 2022

Bench: AKIL KURESHI,SUDESH BANSAL

Sections 2(h), 2(j), 2(n), 2(t), 2(u) & 2(x). It is argued that in terms of the said provisions information of Registrants would be clearly covered and thus would have to be protected from disclosure. The said sections are extracted hereinunder for ease of reference: “2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,— (h) “data