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.

39 results for “section 68”+ Section 75clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi3,243Mumbai2,881Bangalore1,073Ahmedabad741Chennai698Karnataka640Kolkata599Jaipur580Hyderabad455Indore352Chandigarh336Surat320Pune317Cochin270Raipur179Visakhapatnam127Rajkot117Telangana90Nagpur84Lucknow82Cuttack80Guwahati74Calcutta64Allahabad56Amritsar56SC48Agra39Ranchi34Jodhpur24Patna22Varanasi13Dehradun12Jabalpur11Rajasthan9Orissa8Panaji4Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Tripura1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)59Addition to Income34Section 37(1)22Section 14820Section 26319Section 6818Bogus Purchases16Section 14715Section 143(2)13Section 145(3)

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

75 has observed as under: “Where appellant showed unsecured loans received during relevant assessment year and AO made addition on ground that appellant failed to discharge onus of liability as laid down under section 68

VERMA SERVICE STATION,FIROZABAD vs. ACIT, FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 212/AGR/2018[2009-10]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 39 · Page 1 of 2

12
Natural Justice12
Reassessment8
ITAT Agra
11 Sept 2019
AY 2009-10

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

Section 68

section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Hence addition of Rs. 92,00,000/- made by the AO on this account is hereby confirmed. 6. The ld. AR for the assessee reiterated the submission made before the Authorities below he contended that the appellant is a partnership firm comprising of two partners, namely sh. Naveen Chand Verma

ACIT, C 2(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA vs. SUNIL KUMAR JOSHAN, AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 494/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhacit, Vs. Sunil Kumar Joshan, Foot On Shoes, 7Th Circle-2(1)(1), Agra Km Stone, Agra Delhi Bye Pass Road, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abqpj4015P Co 07/Agr/2025 (In Ita No.494/Agr/2025) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Sunil Kumar Joshan, Vs. Acit, Foot On Shoes, 7Th Km Circle-2(1)(1), Stone, Agra Delhi Bye Agra Pass Road, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abqpj4015P

For Appellant: Shri Sahib P. Satsangi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

68 read with section 115BBE of the Act without conducting any enquiries on his side. The following are the documentary evidences submitted by the assessee before the Learned AO to prove the nature and source of credit of the aforesaid sums:- Sl Particulars PB No. Page No. 1 Invitation letter of PHI Singapore dated 28.08.2012 with enclosures

SH. KULDEEP SRIVASTAVA,MATHURA vs. I.T.O., WARD-3(2), MATHURA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 227/AGR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 24Section 24(3)Section 257Section 68

section 50C and the same is reproduced as under: - Name of the Amount of Stamp Amount Sale Proportionate vendee total sale registration considered amount stamp value consideration value for received for assesse computing by the capital gain assesse 1 2 3 4 5 6 Sanjeev Kumar

DCIT CIRCLE-2(1), GWALIOR vs. B.P. EDIBLE OIL PVT LTD, GWALIOR

ITA 347/AGR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 133(6)

75,22,202/-. (3). Following requires verification of the genuineness and correctness: (a). Salary and wages paid amounting to Rs.11,34,125/- (b). Creditors amounting to Rs.1,31,15,424/- (4). The assessee has shown income of Rs.5,32,602/- even when gross receipts of the company has increased from 7,16,66,316/- to Rs.12,79,02,891/- which

AJIT SINGH,SHIVPURI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GWALIOR

In the result, assessee’s appeal ITA No 263/Agr/2025 is allowed

ITA 263/AGR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 Apr 2026AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 69A

75,240/-. Assessment proceedings were completed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act, accepting the returned income vide assessment order dated 22.12.2017. 3. Ld PCIT, while exercising revisional powers vested in him u/s. 263 of the Act, passed original revisional order dated 26.03.2020 and observed that assessee had taken advance of Rs. 77,73,275/- against the sale

HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,AGRA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 251/AGR/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

68 read with section 263, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credit (Gift) Assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 - Assessee received certain amount as gifts from his father and sister who were non-residents in India - Assessing Officer after making detailed enquiries, took a view that assessee had duly proved identity, source and creditworthiness of donors - Commissioner

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 301/AGR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

68 read with section 263, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credit (Gift) Assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 - Assessee received certain amount as gifts from his father and sister who were non-residents in India - Assessing Officer after making detailed enquiries, took a view that assessee had duly proved identity, source and creditworthiness of donors - Commissioner

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 303/AGR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

68 read with section 263, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credit (Gift) Assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 - Assessee received certain amount as gifts from his father and sister who were non-residents in India - Assessing Officer after making detailed enquiries, took a view that assessee had duly proved identity, source and creditworthiness of donors - Commissioner

M/S RADHARANI JEWELLERS LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6/AGR/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Singha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 69A

75,270 after making addition of Rs 10,96,18,898 on account of unexplained cash deposits made in bank account during the demonetization period. The Assessee filed an appeal before the Learned CITA-IV, Kanpur which was decided in favour of the Assessee. The revenue filed an appeal before the Tribunal which is pending till date. Meanwhile the Learned

M/S RADHARANI JEWELLERS LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7/AGR/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Singha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 69A

75,270 after making addition of Rs 10,96,18,898 on account of unexplained cash deposits made in bank account during the demonetization period. The Assessee filed an appeal before the Learned CITA-IV, Kanpur which was decided in favour of the Assessee. The revenue filed an appeal before the Tribunal which is pending till date. Meanwhile the Learned

JHASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JHANSI vs. DY. C.I.T., CIRCLE-4, AGRA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 256/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

Section 2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business

JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JHANSI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 149/AGR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

Section 2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business

ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA vs. JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 355/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

Section 2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business

AGRA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AGRA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 216/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 May 2021AY 2011-12
Section 124Section 142Section 153

section 145(3) is wholly illegal in the facts and circumstances of the case of the appellant. 6. Because the Ld. CIT(A) erred, both in law and on facts, in sustaining the addition of Rs 24,68,23,586/- out of addition of Rs 42,24,51,350/- made by the Assessing Officer. The Ld. CIT(A) further

AMBRISH SARIN,AGRA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AGRA

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 372/AGR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 May 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68

68,733/- 24,29,239/- 00 24.00 4.87 2015-16 5,03,75,128 1,14,70,432/- 28,85,131/- 00 22.77 5.73 It is seen that rate applied by the authorities below is without any basis, as no case comparable to the case of the assessee has been cited, application of N.P rate @ 10% is applied without

HARDAYAL CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST, FIROZABAD vs. ITO (EXP) AGRA, AGRA

In the result, both the revenue appeals ITA No

ITA 246/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 11Section 12ASection 143Section 250Section 56Section 68

75,19,408/-, which was deleted by the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Agra vide order dated 28.02.2017. The appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed vide order dated 28.08.2018 passed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 245 & 246/Agr/2017 on low tax effect (not exceeding 20 lacs). On revenue’s misc. application

ITO EXMP, AGRA vs. HARDAYAL CHARITABLE & EDUCATIONAL TRUST, FIROZABAD

In the result, both the revenue appeals ITA No

ITA 245/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 11Section 12ASection 143Section 250Section 56Section 68

75,19,408/-, which was deleted by the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Agra vide order dated 28.02.2017. The appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed vide order dated 28.08.2018 passed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 245 & 246/Agr/2017 on low tax effect (not exceeding 20 lacs). On revenue’s misc. application

SHRI SIYARAM YADAV,MAINPURI vs. ITO 2(5), MAINPURI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 117/AGR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 292BSection 50CSection 68

68 ITR 638 Hon’ble High Court (AP). xi. Copies of these decisions have been placed on record. 4. I have heard both the parties and have perused the material on record. 5. The question is whether under the undisputed position that no notice u/s 143(2) of the IT Act was issued before completion of assessment proceedings under sections

SHRI NARESH CHANDRA AGRAWAL,GWALIOR vs. ITO WARD 3(1), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 74/AGR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

section 147 the notice issued u/s.148 is barred by limitation as there is no escapement of income and no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts and the initiation of proceedings u/s 147 is based on mere 'change of opinion' which is not permissible in law. In fact