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.

9 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 206C(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Raipur39Chennai38Pune28Delhi16Cochin13Kolkata12Panaji10Rajkot9Dehradun8Bangalore8Jodhpur5Jaipur4Mumbai4Amritsar3Indore3Hyderabad3Ahmedabad1Lucknow1

Key Topics

Section 206C(7)12Section 206C(6)12Section 2069TDS9Section 234E5Section 206C5

SHRI BABULAL MIYARAM GADRI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, TDS-3,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the matter is being restored to the file of the Ld

ITA 54/RJT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

condoned by Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Adisankara Spg. Mills (P.) Ltd. Thus, assessee could not have ITA Nos.51to54/Rjt/2023 Shri Babulal MIyaram Gadri vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2016-17 been deemed as one in default under section 206C(6D) of the Act or liable for interest under section 206(7)." In the case

SHRI BABULAL MIYARAM GADRI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, TDS-3,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the matter is being restored to the file of the Ld

ITA 51/RJT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

condoned by Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Adisankara Spg. Mills (P.) Ltd. Thus, assessee could not have ITA Nos.51to54/Rjt/2023 Shri Babulal MIyaram Gadri vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2016-17 been deemed as one in default under section 206C(6D) of the Act or liable for interest under section 206(7)." In the case

SHRI BABULAL MIYARAM GADRI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, TDS-3,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the matter is being restored to the file of the Ld

ITA 52/RJT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

condoned by Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Adisankara Spg. Mills (P.) Ltd. Thus, assessee could not have ITA Nos.51to54/Rjt/2023 Shri Babulal MIyaram Gadri vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2016-17 been deemed as one in default under section 206C(6D) of the Act or liable for interest under section 206(7)." In the case

SHRI BABULAL MIYARAM GADRI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, TDS-3,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the matter is being restored to the file of the Ld

ITA 53/RJT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

condoned by Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Adisankara Spg. Mills (P.) Ltd. Thus, assessee could not have ITA Nos.51to54/Rjt/2023 Shri Babulal MIyaram Gadri vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2016-17 been deemed as one in default under section 206C(6D) of the Act or liable for interest under section 206(7)." In the case

ARHAM ENTERPRISE,DIST. RAJKOT vs. THE ITO(TDS), WARD-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeal appeals of the assessee i

ITA 228/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Diesh Mohan Sinhashri Diesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr
Section 206

section u/s.206(C) & 206C(7) u/s.206(C) & 206C(7) of the Income Tax Act, 1961( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). , 1961( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). ITA 147, 148/Rjt/25 & 227, 228/Rjt/22 Arham Enterprise v. ITO 2. Since, in these four appeals are Since, in these four appeals are filed by the same assessee, and in the appeals filed

ARHAM ENTERPRISE,RAJKOT vs. ITO, TDS-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeal appeals of the assessee i

ITA 147/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Diesh Mohan Sinhashri Diesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr
Section 206

section u/s.206(C) & 206C(7) u/s.206(C) & 206C(7) of the Income Tax Act, 1961( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). , 1961( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). ITA 147, 148/Rjt/25 & 227, 228/Rjt/22 Arham Enterprise v. ITO 2. Since, in these four appeals are Since, in these four appeals are filed by the same assessee, and in the appeals filed

ARHAM ENTERPRISE,DIST. RAJKOT vs. ITO(TDS), WARD-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeal appeals of the assessee i

ITA 227/RJT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Diesh Mohan Sinhashri Diesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr
Section 206

section u/s.206(C) & 206C(7) u/s.206(C) & 206C(7) of the Income Tax Act, 1961( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). , 1961( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). ITA 147, 148/Rjt/25 & 227, 228/Rjt/22 Arham Enterprise v. ITO 2. Since, in these four appeals are Since, in these four appeals are filed by the same assessee, and in the appeals filed

ARHAM ENTERPRISE,RAJKOT vs. ITO, TDS-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeal appeals of the assessee i

ITA 148/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Diesh Mohan Sinhashri Diesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr
Section 206

section u/s.206(C) & 206C(7) u/s.206(C) & 206C(7) of the Income Tax Act, 1961( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). , 1961( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). ITA 147, 148/Rjt/25 & 227, 228/Rjt/22 Arham Enterprise v. ITO 2. Since, in these four appeals are Since, in these four appeals are filed by the same assessee, and in the appeals filed

VIMALBHAI MOHANBHAI NARIYA PROP. S.M. CORPORATION,,JAMNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-3, , JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, for statistical purpose/

ITA 359/RJT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 359/Rjt/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri V. P. Sutaria, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 206Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 234ESection 234eSection 260CSection 44A

3. Brief facts of the case that the assessee is the property of M/s. S. M. Corporation and engaged in the trading in Brass Scrap. He imports brass scrap and sells it to brass parts manufactures in Jamnagar. As per sec. 206(c) he is required to collect TCS if the scrap is sold to other traders. The assessee sells