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.

7 results for “condonation of delay”+ Block Assessmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai623Mumbai423Delhi385Kolkata278Bangalore252Karnataka160Hyderabad153Ahmedabad102Chandigarh90Jaipur79Patna67Pune61Amritsar42Nagpur34Cuttack31Surat29Indore22Lucknow21Rajkot21Visakhapatnam19Raipur18Guwahati14Dehradun13SC13Ranchi7Telangana7Cochin7Varanasi6Allahabad6Agra4Kerala4Jabalpur3Calcutta3Panaji1Orissa1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 158B8Search & Seizure5Section 260A4Section 143(1)(a)4Section 1323Section 249(4)(a)2Condonation of Delay2

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sri Nama Nageshwar Rao

ITTA/23/2021HC Telangana09 Oct 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 260A

Condonation of Delay) PCIT (CENTRAL) - 3 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ajit Sharma, Senior Standing Counsel versus SATISH DEV JAIN ..... Respondent Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA ITA 23/2021 and connected matters Page 3 of 11 JUDGMENT [VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING] SANJEEV NARULA, J (ORAL): 1. The present appeals under Section 260A

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. M/S. RASA AGROTECH PRIVATE LTD.

Accordingly, the appeals are liable to be dismissed on the

ITTA/453/2012
HC Telangana
18 Feb 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Section 113Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 158BSection 260A

condonation of the delay in filing and re-filing two appeals filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („Act‟) challenging the common impugned order dated 5th April 2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal („ITAT‟) in I.T(SS).A.No.352/Del/1997 and I.T(SS).A.No.104/Del/1997 relating to the block period 1st April

The Commissioner of Income Tax-3 vs. M/s. Rockwell Collins (India) Enterprises PVt. Ltd.,

The appeal is disposed of

ITTA/27/2015HC Telangana15 Jun 2015

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,G.CHANDRAIAH

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 158BSection 246ASection 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 260A

block return of income on 12.01.2000. The Assessing Officer, thereafter, completed the assessment under Section 158BC read with Section 143(3) of the Act on 26.03.2001, determining the taxable income. Aggrieved, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [for short, 'CIT(A)']. 4.1 The CIT(A)-IV rejected the appeal on the ground of delay

EVEREST ORGANICS LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF I.T., HYDERABAD

ITTA/9/2005HC Telangana21 Sept 2022

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 143(1)(a)

condone the delay of the proceedings which is not before it as limitation for framing of reassessment order section 147/143(3) which, in terms of section 153 of the Act (as then applicable ) lapsed on 31.03.1997. 74. The Supreme Court in Popat Bahiru Govardhane v. Land Acquisition Officer29, held thus : 16. It is a settled legal proposition that

C. SANYASI RAJU vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VIZAG.

ITTA/7/2005HC Telangana21 Nov 2017

Bench: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,T.AMARNATH GOUD

Section 143(1)(a)

condone the delay of the proceedings which is not before it as limitation for framing of reassessment order section 147/143(3) which, in terms of section 153 of the Act (as then applicable ) lapsed on 31.03.1997. 74. The Supreme Court in Popat Bahiru Govardhane v. Land Acquisition Officer29, held thus : 16. It is a settled legal proposition that

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s.Samrakshna Electricals Ltd

ITTA/28/2010HC Telangana21 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 143(1)(a)

condone the delay of the proceedings which is not before it as limitation for framing of reassessment order section 147/143(3) which, in terms of section 153 of the Act (as then applicable ) lapsed on 31.03.1997. 74. The Supreme Court in Popat Bahiru Govardhane v. Land Acquisition Officer29, held thus : 16. It is a settled legal proposition that

M/s.GVK Petro Chemicals Private Limited,(Novo Resins AND vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,

ITTA/8/2005HC Telangana05 Jul 2012
Section 143(1)(a)

condone the delay of the proceedings which is not before it as limitation for framing of reassessment order section 147/143(3) which, in terms of section 153 of the Act (as then applicable ) lapsed on 31.03.1997. 74. The Supreme Court in Popat Bahiru Govardhane v. Land Acquisition Officer29, held thus : 16. It is a settled legal proposition that