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.

7 results for “section 68”+ Section 220(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi993Mumbai653Karnataka462Bangalore257Ahmedabad184Chennai176Jaipur168Kolkata148Hyderabad116Chandigarh80Pune64Raipur61Indore57Guwahati43Cochin37Lucknow34Surat33Panaji31Nagpur24Visakhapatnam22Allahabad22Calcutta16SC15Rajkot10Cuttack9Patna9Dehradun8Agra7Ranchi7Telangana7Jodhpur6Kerala5Rajasthan5Amritsar4Orissa3Varanasi2Andhra Pradesh1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 686Addition to Income6Section 693Section 234A3Section 2502Section 1482Section 46A2Section 40A(2)(b)2Section 40A(3)2Cash Deposit

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, MORENA vs. SHRI AGRASEN LOGISTICS, JOTAI ROAD, PORSA,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 108/AGR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Agra24 Jun 2025AY 2022-23
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

section 68. SLP dismissed by Supreme Court reported at 258 Tахтап\n160 (SC).\n17.3 It was held by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Blessing Construction Vs ITO [2013] 214\nТахтап 645 (Gujarat) where sizeable amounts were deposited in cash in account of\ndepositors only before their withdrawal through cheques in favour of assessee, addition\nwas justified. Surrounding Circumstances

VERMA SERVICE STATION,FIROZABAD vs. ACIT, FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 212/AGR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra
2
Unexplained Investment2
Unexplained Cash Credit2
11 Sept 2019
AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 68

2. Capacity of creditors to advance money; and 3. Genuineness of transaction. As to the issue of genuineness of transaction, it was further held in the above decision that the transaction is not genuine, simply because some, I.T.A No. 212/Agra/2018 8 out of many, of the transactions are by cheque. Where certain sum of money claimed by the assessee

ARJUN TRADING CO. PVT. LTD.,FIROZABAD vs. I.T.O.-5(1), FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 290/AGR/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Agra08 Jun 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaarjun Trading Company Private Vs..Ito-5,(1), Ltd. A-4, Ganesh Nagar, Firozabad. Firozabad. Panno.Aadca7230J (Assessee) (Revenue)

Section 234ASection 234BSection 254Section 68

220 Taxman 165(Mag) (Del), wherein it has been held that where notices to five out of nine share applicants returned unserved although other evidences were filed, the addition made u/s 68 is justified. Since the assessee's claim in terms of vital ingredients of section 68 i.e. the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions involved, has not been

SMT. NEETA SHARMA,AGRA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, AGRA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 299/AGR/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 234ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(3)Section 46A

220) (vi) [2017] 88 taxmann.com 506 (Gujarat High Court) CIT vs. Patel Proteins (P) Ltd. (Para 2 Pg. 222) (vii) [2013] 40 taxmann.com 177 (Gujarat High Court) CIT, Ahmedabad vs. Riddhi Steel and Tube (P) Ltd. (Para 9.2 Pg. 230) (viii) [2011] 12 taxmann.com 411 (Punjab & Haryana HC) CIT, Ludhiana vs. Santosh Box Factory (P) Ltd. (Para 2

A.C.I.T.-2, AGRA vs. SMT. NEETA SHARMA PROP., AGRA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 286/AGR/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 234ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(3)Section 46A

220) (vi) [2017] 88 taxmann.com 506 (Gujarat High Court) CIT vs. Patel Proteins (P) Ltd. (Para 2 Pg. 222) (vii) [2013] 40 taxmann.com 177 (Gujarat High Court) CIT, Ahmedabad vs. Riddhi Steel and Tube (P) Ltd. (Para 9.2 Pg. 230) (viii) [2011] 12 taxmann.com 411 (Punjab & Haryana HC) CIT, Ludhiana vs. Santosh Box Factory (P) Ltd. (Para 2

SH SANJAY BANSAL ,MORENA vs. A.C.I.T (CENTRAL), GWALIOR

In the result, assessee's appeal is dismissed

ITA 31/AGR/2022[2012 - 13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Apr 2025

Bench: learned CIT(Appeals) who has very exhaustively passed the impugned order in 60 pages and considered all the submissions of the assessee in the tabulated form and otherwise, which need not to be repeated again for the sake of brevity. However, learned CIT(Appeals) partly allowed assessee's appeal confirming the addition only to the extent of Rs.71,44,045/- as against addition of Rs.91,06,669/-. 4. Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on the following grounds : "1.Because in any view, th

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

68 to 73 of paper book) and sale bills (page no. 74 to 82 of paper book). On perusal of purchase bills, it has been found that various purchases of grains were made in cash. The appellant vide this office letter date 24.11.2021 was asked to submit the explanation that why such purchases should not be disallowed

M/S ESCO MARUTI BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,,AGRA vs. J.C.I.T., RANGE-4, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 280/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 133ASection 68

section 133A of the Act was conducted at its business premises on 15.03.2011, wherein, the survey party had found and impounded certain incriminating documents. One such impounded document is marked as Annexure- 4, which is a ledger, and as per details recorded therein, it was found that the assessee had received cash advances amounting to Rs.8