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 “section 68”+ Section 69clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi4,117Mumbai2,953Bangalore1,132Chennai842Jaipur794Ahmedabad767Kolkata673Karnataka644Hyderabad620Indore398Surat370Chandigarh349Pune326Cochin257Raipur188Visakhapatnam153Rajkot139Nagpur126Amritsar114Cuttack106Telangana100Guwahati88Ranchi87Lucknow74Calcutta65Jodhpur58Agra57Allahabad54SC51Dehradun45Patna44Varanasi16Panaji15Jabalpur11Orissa10Rajasthan9ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI2Kerala2Punjab & Haryana2Andhra Pradesh1Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)4Section 1322

M/S.VIRTUAL SOFT SYSTEMS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-I

C.A. No.-007115-007115 - 2005Supreme Court06 Feb 2007
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I
Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

69 and 249 ITR 670) will apply even after insertion of Explanation 4 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with effect from 1.4.1976? FACTS (C.A. NO. 7115 OF 2005) For the assessment year 1996-97, the assessee-appellant returned an income of Rs. 1,32,44,507.29 subject to depreciation. The depreciation claimed

P.R. METRANI vs. COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

Appeals are allowed

C.A. No.-005673-005675 - 2002Supreme Court15 Nov 2006
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore
Section 132Section 132(5)Section 139(2)Section 143(2)Section 69C

69 of the Act? (2) On the facts whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the part of the entries in the seized documents could be attributed to the applicant HUF when the applicant had denied the knowledge or ownership of the document?" The High Court answered all the four questions in favour of the Revenue and against