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 35(1)(i)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai919Chennai886Delhi839Kolkata484Bangalore430Ahmedabad320Jaipur301Hyderabad243Raipur240Pune227Indore188Chandigarh177Karnataka148Surat137Amritsar123Nagpur90Visakhapatnam71Lucknow69Cochin62Rajkot61Cuttack41Calcutta40Patna32SC30Agra27Panaji26Telangana18Guwahati17Allahabad17Jodhpur15Varanasi15Jabalpur13Dehradun7Rajasthan5Orissa4Ranchi3Kerala3Himachal Pradesh2Andhra Pradesh2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 11(2)5Section 404Condonation of Delay3Section 12A2Section 143(3)2Deduction2TDS2Disallowance2Addition to Income

DINESH AGARWAL HUF,PATNA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for

ITA 262/RAN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 143(3)Section 40

1. For that Ld CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without appreciating the facts and grounds of appeal. 2. For that there is a double addition of Rs. 17,66,329/- to the extent that the same has been added by the Ld AO individually as well as included

DINESH AGARWAL HUF,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), RANCHI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for

ITA 263/RAN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

2
Bench:
Section 143(3)Section 40

1. For that Ld CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without appreciating the facts and grounds of appeal. 2. For that there is a double addition of Rs. 17,66,329/- to the extent that the same has been added by the Ld AO individually as well as included

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF STUDY AND RESEARCH IN LAW,RANCHI vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX ,CPC, BENGALURU

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

ITA 399/RAN/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 Nov 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) National University Of Study & Assistant Director Of Research In Law, Ranchi, Income Tax, Vs. Nusrl Campus, Pithoria Road, P.O- C.P.C., Bangaluru. Burku At Nagri, Jharkhand. Pan No. Aaajn 0847 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 10Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143

condonation of delay was not acceded by the department. 4. The appellant then filed a rectification application against the above demand notice, however, the same was rejected by the department. The appellant institute, therefore, filed another rectification application, however, the department bearing DIN No. CPC/1920/U7/2013753186 dated 04/02/2021 disallowed both the revenue expenditure as well as the capital expenditure claimed