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.

11 results for “condonation of delay”+ Penaltyclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai1,421Mumbai1,339Delhi934Pune652Kolkata534Ahmedabad455Bangalore400Jaipur390Hyderabad289Surat208Chandigarh184Indore173Lucknow146Raipur145Nagpur135Rajkot133Cochin125Visakhapatnam105Cuttack95Amritsar74Patna72Agra57Calcutta54Karnataka51Guwahati40Ranchi30SC27Panaji26Dehradun24Jabalpur23Jodhpur19Allahabad15Telangana11Varanasi5Orissa4Himachal Pradesh2Punjab & Haryana2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1VIKRAMAJIT SEN SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 143(1)(a)4Section 260A4Search & Seizure4Penalty3Section 672Section 271(2)2Addition to Income2

THE COMMIR.OF INCOME-TAX A.P.-II.HYD. vs. MOHD.SIDDIQ PROP.M/S.HUMA ATCHANDRADIO.

In the result, Question No

ITTA/52/2001HC Telangana04 Jul 2013
For Respondent: Sri S.R. Ashok
Section 271(2)

penalty. The assessee’s explanation was accepted by the first appellate authority so far as refundable empty bottle deposit and unreconciled difference in the balance sheet are concerned. The Department appealed to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and the assessee filed Cross-Objections in that appeal with a delay of 17 days. The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the Department

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sri Chirla Rama Reddy

ITTA/798/2006HC Telangana28 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 260A

Delay condoned. Date of order: 30-7-2018 I.T.A. No.798/2006 The Commissioner of Income-Tax & Anr. vs. Sri K.Gopal 5/22 Liberty is given to the Department to move the High Court pointing out that the Circular dated February 9, 2011 should not be applied ipso facto, particularly, when the matter has a cascading effect. There are cases under the Income

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s.Voith Turbo Pvt Ltd

ITTA/168/2006HC Telangana17 Feb 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 260A

Delay condoned. Date of order: 30-7-2018 I.T.A. No.168/2006 The Commissioner of Income-Tax & Anr. vs. Sri Anil Kabra 5/22 Liberty is given to the Department to move the High Court pointing out that the Circular dated February 9, 2011 should not be applied ipso facto, particularly, when the matter has a cascading effect. There are cases under

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax [TDS] vs. M/s.KCIL-MEIL [JV]

ITTA/212/2015HC Telangana02 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 55Section 55(5)(a)Section 67

penalty. Therefore, the remand is unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Tribunal through a common order dated 29.05.2015 rejected both the contentions. Hence, the revision at the instance of the Revenue. 5. On 22.12.2015, this Court while condoning the delay

PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX-2 vs. JEEVAN SHAKTHI CHIT FUND PVT LTD.,

ITTA/56/2015HC Telangana03 Aug 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

condoned. The applications are disposed of. ITA 56/2015 ITA 167/2015 ITA 168/2015 ITA 169/2015 ITA 170/2015 1. In these five appeals, the revenue is aggrieved by an order dated Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified 09.11.2012 of the ITAT. Though there is a delay it is stated that it was due to delay in re-filing the appeal

Commissioner of Income Tax- IT and TP vs. M/s. Louis Berger International Inc.,

ITTA/108/2022HC Telangana25 Sept 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

delay in the clearance of the imported consignments, the appellants and its sister concern had been compelled to pay excess duty of over Rs 25 crores from August 2013 onwards. It is unfortunate and has to be accepted that the respondent authorities had compelled and forced the appellant to furnish the letter dated 6- 3-2017 thereby waiving

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. M/s. Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.

ITTA/94/2022HC Telangana24 Aug 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

delay in the clearance of the imported consignments, the appellants and its sister concern had been compelled to pay excess duty of over Rs 25 crores from August 2013 onwards. It is unfortunate and has to be accepted that the respondent authorities had compelled and forced the appellant to furnish the letter dated 6- 3-2017 thereby waiving

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)

penalty for the breach. This is so even though Counsel Played no part in the decsion making process and even through the tribunal adopted Counsel’s Draft reasons only after due consideration. Such Practice Amounts to denail of natural justice because it raises suspicion of bias. 70. Thus, the tribunal has rightly concluded that the AO has passed the order

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)

penalty for the breach. This is so even though Counsel Played no part in the decsion making process and even through the tribunal adopted Counsel’s Draft reasons only after due consideration. Such Practice Amounts to denail of natural justice because it raises suspicion of bias. 70. Thus, the tribunal has rightly concluded that the AO has passed the order

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)

penalty for the breach. This is so even though Counsel Played no part in the decsion making process and even through the tribunal adopted Counsel’s Draft reasons only after due consideration. Such Practice Amounts to denail of natural justice because it raises suspicion of bias. 70. Thus, the tribunal has rightly concluded that the AO has passed the order

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)

penalty for the breach. This is so even though Counsel Played no part in the decsion making process and even through the tribunal adopted Counsel’s Draft reasons only after due consideration. Such Practice Amounts to denail of natural justice because it raises suspicion of bias. 70. Thus, the tribunal has rightly concluded that the AO has passed the order