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 33(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai721Delhi632Mumbai592Kolkata361Bangalore298Hyderabad240Ahmedabad236Jaipur170Raipur167Karnataka147Chandigarh138Pune137Nagpur118Surat88Amritsar76Indore63Cochin58Lucknow58Visakhapatnam57Cuttack43Panaji41Calcutta37Rajkot36SC30Patna23Telangana16Varanasi11Allahabad9Guwahati7Dehradun6Agra5Ranchi5Rajasthan5Orissa4Jodhpur3Himachal Pradesh2Kerala1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1Andhra Pradesh1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Reassessment5

ALOK KUMAR,RANCHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE TWO

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 185/RAN/2024[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Oct 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

33 In the case of S.S.M Aimed Husain vs ITO [2017] 85 taxman, com 351 (Madras) the assessee filed an appeal before the commissioner (Appeal) along with an application for condone nation of delay of 175 days. The assessee claimed that delay occurred since he was waiting outcome of penalty order. The Commissioner (Appeals) however refused to condone the delay

ALOK KUMAR,KANKE ROAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE TWO

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 198/RAN/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Oct 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

33 In the case of S.S.M Aimed Husain vs ITO [2017] 85 taxman, com 351 (Madras) the assessee filed an appeal before the commissioner (Appeal) along with an application for condone nation of delay of 175 days. The assessee claimed that delay occurred since he was waiting outcome of penalty order. The Commissioner (Appeals) however refused to condone the delay

ALOK KUMAR,KANKE ROAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE TWO

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 199/RAN/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Oct 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

33 In the case of S.S.M Aimed Husain vs ITO [2017] 85 taxman, com 351 (Madras) the assessee filed an appeal before the commissioner (Appeal) along with an application for condone nation of delay of 175 days. The assessee claimed that delay occurred since he was waiting outcome of penalty order. The Commissioner (Appeals) however refused to condone the delay

ALOK KUMAR,KANKE ROAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE TWO

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 200/RAN/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Oct 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

33 In the case of S.S.M Aimed Husain vs ITO [2017] 85 taxman, com 351 (Madras) the assessee filed an appeal before the commissioner (Appeal) along with an application for condone nation of delay of 175 days. The assessee claimed that delay occurred since he was waiting outcome of penalty order. The Commissioner (Appeals) however refused to condone the delay

ALOK KUMAR,KANKE ROAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE TWO

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 201/RAN/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

33 In the case of S.S.M Aimed Husain vs ITO [2017] 85 taxman, com 351 (Madras) the assessee filed an appeal before the commissioner (Appeal) along with an application for condone nation of delay of 175 days. The assessee claimed that delay occurred since he was waiting outcome of penalty order. The Commissioner (Appeals) however refused to condone the delay