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.

2 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 36(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai906Delhi659Mumbai651Kolkata406Bangalore289Jaipur243Ahmedabad215Pune213Hyderabad204Indore192Chandigarh182Amritsar110Raipur94Lucknow77Surat62Panaji53Cochin43Rajkot39Nagpur36Visakhapatnam35Cuttack29SC25Patna24Guwahati22Calcutta21Jodhpur13Agra13Varanasi8Dehradun6Telangana6Jabalpur6Karnataka6Allahabad6Orissa5Kerala5Rajasthan5Andhra Pradesh2Ranchi2Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 1473Section 1483Addition to Income2Condonation of Delay2

M/S. JUNIOR CHAMBER INTERNATIONAL,,RANCHI vs. ITO , EXEMPTION WARD, RANCHI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 33/RAN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 12A

36 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal, for which the appellant has filed application for condonation of delay. In the condonation application, the learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the appellant stated that the delay was caused due to the fact that the management of the society is changed each year and the current management was not aware

KUMAR PRATIK,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SAHIBGANJ

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 132/RAN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) Kumar Pratik, I.T.O., Tower C2, Flat 1402, Eden City, Sahibganj. Vs. Mahestala, Kolkata-700137. Pan No. Buapp 7990 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Bench:
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

condone the delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the Assessing Officer, on the basis of AIR/CIB(NMS Data) information found that the assessee has not filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2015-16 despite the fact that he has carried out financial transactions in immovable property