BharatTax.net

ITA/325/2019 · 5/8/2024

ITA/11/2023 · 21/5/2024

ITA/48/2017 · 5/4/2024

ITA/46/2017 · 5/4/2024

ITA/196/2019 · 4/9/2024

ITA 1271/JPR/2025 · 20/2/2026

The Tribunal held that the penalty appeal cannot be adjudicated as the quantum issues are yet to be determined by the CIT (Appeals). The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT (Appeals) and relegated the issue to the CIT (Appeals) for fresh adjudication after the quantum appeal is decided.

ITA 1423/JPR/2025 · 23/3/2026

The Tribunal followed the decisions of the ITAT and the Rajasthan High Court, which held that the assessee qualified for exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) as an educational institution. The court's prior ruling established the assessee as an educational institution existing solely for education.

ITA 1339/JPR/2025 · 23/3/2026

The Tribunal held that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in the assessee's own case, which followed the order of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court. Since there was no change in facts for the assessment years in question, the Tribunal respectfully followed the ITAT's decision and allowed the claim for exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act.

ITA 357/JPR/2025 · 23/3/2026

The Tribunal held that the addition for unexplained investment in land was not justified as the assessee had established the source of investment with detailed evidence. The trading addition was also deleted as it was an estimate without specific defects in the books of account.

ITA 1764/JPR/2025 · 23/3/2026

The assessee challenged the issuance of notice u/s 148 and the assessment order, arguing that proceedings under Section 153C should have been initiated as the seized documents were from a third party. The CIT(A) allowed the appeal, quashing the proceedings based on the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan's order in DB Civil Writ Petition No.18363/2019.

ITA/2/2024 · 28/4/2025

ITA/7/2024 · 28/4/2025

ITA/43/2013 · 3/4/2024

ITA/10/2016 · 14/7/2023

ITA/6/2017 · 13/7/2023

ITA 284/PAT/2025 · 26/2/2026

The Tribunal held that the rejection of books of account and the subsequent addition by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) were incorrect. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had disclosed sales in its profit and loss account and that most suppliers had confirmed the transactions. The Tribunal found no specific defects in the assessee's books of account.

ITA 236/PAT/2025 · 6/3/2026

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal as the reasons provided were bonafide and genuine. The Tribunal also admitted additional evidence (a lease deed dated 24.01.2011) filed by the assessee, deeming it to have a significant bearing on the issue. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer (AO) for a fresh decision considering this additional evidence.

ITA 442/PAT/2024 · 26/2/2026

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition for undisclosed sales, agreeing that profit should be estimated on unaccounted purchases using the GP rate. The Tribunal also upheld the deletion of the expense disallowance, as estimation of income already accounted for this.

ITA 237/PAT/2025 · 26/2/2026

The Tribunal held that additions based on documents seized from a third party can only be made under Section 153C of the Income-tax Act, not under Section 153A or 143(3). The AO's jurisdiction was transferred after the documents were seized from the third party, making Section 153C applicable. The addition made on this basis was deleted.

ITA 373/PAT/2025 · 26/2/2026

The Tribunal held that additions based on documents seized from a third party must be initiated under section 153C of the Act, not section 153A. Since the documents were found from a third party and handed over after the jurisdiction transfer, section 153C was mandatory for the relevant assessment years.