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 378clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka103Delhi94Mumbai71Chennai70Kolkata47Bangalore41Calcutta37Jaipur36Hyderabad35Ahmedabad22Rajkot18Indore16Pune13Lucknow13Cuttack11Amritsar9Visakhapatnam8Varanasi6Chandigarh5Jodhpur5Allahabad5Surat3Telangana3Cochin2SC2Orissa1Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 44A3Section 143(3)2

VIDHYA VARSHINI EDUCATION TRUST ,VAPI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1259/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Bijayananda Pruseth (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2018-19 and 2020-21 respectively. I.T.A Nos. 1259 & 1260/SRT/2024 A.Ys. 2018-19 & 2020-21 Page No 2 Vidhya Varshini Education Trust vs. ITO 2. The registry has noted that there is a delay of 378 days and 247 days

VIDHYA VARSHINI EDUCATION TRUST,VAPI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1260/SRT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Bijayananda Pruseth (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2018-19 and 2020-21 respectively. I.T.A Nos. 1259 & 1260/SRT/2024 A.Ys. 2018-19 & 2020-21 Page No 2 Vidhya Varshini Education Trust vs. ITO 2. The registry has noted that there is a delay of 378 days and 247 days

S M CONSTRUCTION,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(3)(1), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 539/SRT/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Viral Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Jayshree Thakur, Sr. D.R
Section 133(6)Section 143Section 148Section 194JSection 44A

section addition was made. (4) That, the Assessing officer failed to appreciate the facts of the case in the right perspective and order is issued without considering the reply of appellant, without issuing speaking order. Order issued was against the natural justice and need to be deleted. (5) That, without prejudice to above, an addition of Rs.275,378 being