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.

4 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 226(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka175Chennai132Delhi99Mumbai99Hyderabad54Pune52Raipur47Jaipur46Bangalore44Ahmedabad36Kolkata34Indore18Guwahati16Surat16Lucknow14Jodhpur13Cuttack12Visakhapatnam7Nagpur7SC6Panaji6Chandigarh4Telangana4Cochin4Rajkot4Rajasthan3Calcutta2Kerala1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Orissa1Andhra Pradesh1Allahabad1Varanasi1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 158B4Section 214Section 1243Section 260A2Section 249(4)(a)2Section 12A2

The Commissioner of Income TAx-IV, vs. M/s. Mahaveer Enterprises (India) Limited

The Appeal is dismissed

ITTA/94/2008HC Telangana23 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 21

226 of the Constitution of India, and the High Court, after elaborately considering the various contentions, took the view that subsection (3) of Section 10 does not envisage, taking physical and de facto possession of the surplus land, for which proceedings under subsection (5) of Section 10 have to be followed. On facts also, the Division Bench found no reason

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 158B
Section 246A
Section 249(4)
Section 249(4)(a)
Section 260A

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 and latches. The Tribunal, at the instance of the assessee, condoned the delay and directed CIT(A) to re-hear

Maheswara Educational Society, vs. Director of Income Tax (Exemptions)

ITTA/90/2008HC Telangana09 Apr 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

For Appellant: SRI C V NARASIMHAM, ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI A RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, SC FOR INCOME
Section 10Section 124Section 12ASection 260Section 260ASection 72A

Section 10(23C) (iii ad) of the Act is concerned. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that the Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) as also the ITAT ought to have allowed the appeal and condoned the delay considering the bona fide and reasonable grounds explained by the app,eltant. According to the learned counsel for the appellant

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Smt. Raj Kumari

Accordingly are partly allowed

ITTA/23/2008HC Telangana28 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

delay. 38. He submits that learned Single Judge although purportedly referred to cases cited above, considered those oblivious of underlying principle. The matters require re-appreciation and reconsideration. 16. He further submits, may be that an objection to maintainability of the appeals is sought to be raised, however, the same having been raised after admission of the appeals, it loses