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 194Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Nagpur100Chandigarh81Chennai32Mumbai25Bangalore22Pune22Jaipur17Delhi17Hyderabad16Kolkata13Ahmedabad8Cochin7Raipur7Surat6Rajkot5Visakhapatnam4Panaji3Lucknow3SC3Varanasi2Jodhpur2Karnataka1Cuttack1Indore1

Key Topics

Section 201(1)2Section 2012TDS2Natural Justice2Limitation/Time-bar2Condonation of Delay2

PRATAP DIAGNOSTIC CENTER,AZAMGARH vs. ITO (TDS),, AZAMGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7/VNS/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi04 Jul 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Pankaj Choubey, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 201Section 201(1)

condone the delay in filing these two appeals. 4. The assessee has raised the common grounds:- "1. Because the learned Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in passing the impugned order u/s 201/201(1A) dated 31.03.2017 without allowing proper opportunity of hearing to the appellant and hence suffers from natural justice. 2. Because the learned

PRATAP DIAGNOSTIC CENTER,AZAMGARH vs. ITO (TDS), AZAMGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8/VNS/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi04 Jul 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Pankaj Choubey, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 201Section 201(1)

condone the delay in filing these two appeals. 4. The assessee has raised the common grounds:- "1. Because the learned Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in passing the impugned order u/s 201/201(1A) dated 31.03.2017 without allowing proper opportunity of hearing to the appellant and hence suffers from natural justice. 2. Because the learned