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.

318 results for “section 68”+ Section 145(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,119Mumbai1,098Karnataka495Jaipur366Ahmedabad318Kolkata300Bangalore235Chennai194Chandigarh180Cochin129Agra126Surat120Indore107Hyderabad100Pune88Raipur75Rajkot74Lucknow56Calcutta54Amritsar53Visakhapatnam47Nagpur45Allahabad44Cuttack42Telangana40Ranchi36Jodhpur20Dehradun18Patna16SC16Guwahati15Varanasi7Rajasthan5Jabalpur4Panaji3Orissa3Kerala2Punjab & Haryana1Gauhati1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Addition to Income74Section 143(3)57Section 6854Section 14A41Disallowance39Section 14826Section 25025Section 13217Section 115J17Section 147

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA, VADODARA vs. HK ISPAT PVT LTD, GODHRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

ITA 1278/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesn

Section 250Section 68

145 taxmann.com 27), the Gujarat High Court held that where the assessee furnished necessary material to prove identity of the lenders and the loan was repaid in the subsequent year, even the ingredients of creditworthiness and genuineness were deemed satisfied, and therefore, no addition under section 68 could be made. Again, in PCIT v. Ojas Tarmake

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA, VADODARA vs. HK ISPAT PVT LTD, GODHRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

ITA 1277/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad

Showing 1–20 of 318 · Page 1 of 16

...
16
Cash Deposit13
Depreciation13
18 Mar 2026
AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesn

Section 250Section 68

145 taxmann.com 27), the Gujarat High Court held that where the assessee furnished necessary material to prove identity of the lenders and the loan was repaid in the subsequent year, even the ingredients of creditworthiness and genuineness were deemed satisfied, and therefore, no addition under section 68 could be made. Again, in PCIT v. Ojas Tarmake

H K ISPAT PVT. LTD.,PANCHMAHAL vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

ITA 1392/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesn

Section 250Section 68

145 taxmann.com 27), the Gujarat High Court held that where the assessee furnished necessary material to prove identity of the lenders and the loan was repaid in the subsequent year, even the ingredients of creditworthiness and genuineness were deemed satisfied, and therefore, no addition under section 68 could be made. Again, in PCIT v. Ojas Tarmake

SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES,MUMBAI vs. JCIT 20(3), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 3507/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT-DR
Section 80I

145(1) is an enabling provision. It is intended to enable the Assessing Officer to make the correct Group Appeals – Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd (Erstwhile M/s. Sun Pharma Sikkim) AY : 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 21 assessment which is the paramount object. It is not intended to confer any right or benefit upon an erring assessee. Thus, this section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, VEJAPUR vs. DARSHAN ORNA LIMITED, NAVRANGPURA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1606/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1606/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Income Tax Officer Darshan Orna Limited बनाम/ Vejalpur 102, Shri Balaju Paragon V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 C.G. Road Navrangpura Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aadcd 7142 E अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Deepak Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/04/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

145(3) of the Act. The cash deposits of Rs. 2,18,00,000/- ITO vs. Darshan Orna Ltd. Asst. Year : 2017-18 5 were consequently treated as unexplained cash credits under section 68

THE DCIT.CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE SANAND TEXTILE INDS.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1166/AHD/2014[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jan 2020AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.995/Ahd/2014 With Co No.167/Ahd/2014 (In Ita No.1166/Ahd/2014) ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 1995-96) Shree Sanand Textiles The Dy.Cit (Osd) बनाम/ Industries Ltd. Circle-8 Vs. 10-A, Sattar Taluka Society Ahmedabad B/H. C.U. Shah College Navjivan Press Road Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamc 8881 G (Appellant & Cross Objector) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1166/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 1995-96) The Dcit Shree Sanand Textile बनाम/ Circle-8 Industries Ltd., Vs. Ahmedabad Ahmedabad .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anil R.Shah, Shri Tushar Hemani & Ms.Kinjal Shah, Ars Revenue By : Shri Vidhut Trivedi, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Anil R.ShahFor Respondent: Shri Vidhut Trivedi, Sr.DR
Section 148Section 68

3,76,44,053 with CO No.167/Ahd/2014(By Assessee) & ITA No.1166/Ahd/2014(By Revenue) Shree Sanand Textile Industries Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year – 1995-96 9.3. Admittedly, the amount of sale as claimed by the assessee was offered to tax by reflecting the same in the trading and profit and loss account. This fact has not been doubted by the authorities below

SHREE SANAND TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 995/AHD/2014[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jan 2020AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.995/Ahd/2014 With Co No.167/Ahd/2014 (In Ita No.1166/Ahd/2014) ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 1995-96) Shree Sanand Textiles The Dy.Cit (Osd) बनाम/ Industries Ltd. Circle-8 Vs. 10-A, Sattar Taluka Society Ahmedabad B/H. C.U. Shah College Navjivan Press Road Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamc 8881 G (Appellant & Cross Objector) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1166/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 1995-96) The Dcit Shree Sanand Textile बनाम/ Circle-8 Industries Ltd., Vs. Ahmedabad Ahmedabad .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anil R.Shah, Shri Tushar Hemani & Ms.Kinjal Shah, Ars Revenue By : Shri Vidhut Trivedi, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Anil R.ShahFor Respondent: Shri Vidhut Trivedi, Sr.DR
Section 148Section 68

3,76,44,053 with CO No.167/Ahd/2014(By Assessee) & ITA No.1166/Ahd/2014(By Revenue) Shree Sanand Textile Industries Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year – 1995-96 9.3. Admittedly, the amount of sale as claimed by the assessee was offered to tax by reflecting the same in the trading and profit and loss account. This fact has not been doubted by the authorities below

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 187/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Revenue by Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT DR with Shri Urjit Shah, A.R
Section 40ASection 68

3 cars namely Audi-A6, Sonata, Innova on the reasoning A.Y. 2009-2010 with others 11 that the assessee has failed to furnish the ownership of the cars in dispute which is one of the prerequisite to claim depreciation. Admittedly, the assessee has furnished the purchase invoices and RC book which are placed on pages 145

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1320/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Revenue by Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT DR with Shri Urjit Shah, A.R
Section 40ASection 68

3 cars namely Audi-A6, Sonata, Innova on the reasoning A.Y. 2009-2010 with others 11 that the assessee has failed to furnish the ownership of the cars in dispute which is one of the prerequisite to claim depreciation. Admittedly, the assessee has furnished the purchase invoices and RC book which are placed on pages 145

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1447/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Revenue by Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT DR with Shri Urjit Shah, A.R
Section 40ASection 68

3 cars namely Audi-A6, Sonata, Innova on the reasoning A.Y. 2009-2010 with others 11 that the assessee has failed to furnish the ownership of the cars in dispute which is one of the prerequisite to claim depreciation. Admittedly, the assessee has furnished the purchase invoices and RC book which are placed on pages 145

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2557/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Revenue by Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT DR with Shri Urjit Shah, A.R
Section 40ASection 68

3 cars namely Audi-A6, Sonata, Innova on the reasoning A.Y. 2009-2010 with others 11 that the assessee has failed to furnish the ownership of the cars in dispute which is one of the prerequisite to claim depreciation. Admittedly, the assessee has furnished the purchase invoices and RC book which are placed on pages 145

RAVIKUMAR KAMLESHBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -5(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 497/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri M. S. Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri C. Dharninath V. S., Sr. D.R
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 145Section 68

145 of the Act made by the Ld. A.O. Asstt. Year- 2017-18 2 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the addition U/S 68 of the Act of Rs. 3,28,75,000/- of sales made in cash as unexplained cash credit. 4. The Ld. CIT(A0 has erred in law and on facts in invoking section

DCIT CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI ALPESHKUMAR C.PATEL, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1991/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1908/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Alpeshkumar C. Patel, A.C.I.T., 503, Milestone Building, Vs. Circle-3(3), Drive In Road, Ahmedabad. Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380052. Pan: Aeapp9489G

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Pratap Singh CIT. D.R with Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 41(1)Section 54F

145(3) of the Act. When the books are rejected, a lump sum addition is made to the original return of income. Such addition may be based on estimate of turnover and profit rate or disallowance of claims, expenditure, etc. as held by the Hon’ble Supreme court in case of CIT v. Pilliah & Sons

SAKET M JAINI(HUF),AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-5, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 579/AHD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 579/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 Saket M. Jain (Huf), The Pr. Commissioner Of 403, 3Rd Eye Two, Vs. Income Tax-2, Nr. Joyalukkas Show Room, Ahmedabad. Opp. Parimal Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri A.L. Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

68 of the Act. The learned Pr. CIT also referred to the judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Wadhwa Designs ITA No 66/2018 in support of his view. Accordingly, the learned Pr. CIT was of the opinion that the finding of the AO in the assessment framed under section 143(3) read with

INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ANKIT GOLD LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 429/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri
Section 133(6)Section 145Section 68

145 of the Act, deeming the reported sales figures as being manipulated and unreliable. The Assessing Officer proceeded to treat the entire cash deposit during the demonetization period as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. Thus, an addition of Rs. 3

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD, INCOME TAX VEJALPUR OFFICE NEAR SACHIN TOWER vs. ARVINDBHAI JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED, OPP LAL BANGLOW AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1113/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Ito, Ward-1(1)(3) Vs. Arvindbhai Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Ahmedabad. 408/5, Arvindbhai House C.G. Road, Opp: Lal Bunglow, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaeac 9595 R (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Ms.Arti N. Shah, Ar : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/10/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Ms.Arti N. Shah, AR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 271ASection 68

145(3) of the Act and held that the cash deposits of Rs.9,37,76,500/- were not supported by genuine sales and represented income from undisclosed sources. The said amount was added under section 68

KIRTI MILEX LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 686/AHD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.686/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 M/S. Kirti Milex Ltd., I.T.O, 5, Vasukanan, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Ward-2(1)(2), Nr.Lotus Flats, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri Hem Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Goel, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 292BSection 68

68 of Act of Rs.35,00,000/-. 6. The appellant craves liberty to add, amend, alter or modify all or any grounds of appeal before final appeal. 2. The 1st issue raised by the assessee is general in nature. Therefore we do not find any reason to adjudicate the same. Accordingly, we dismiss the ground of appeal of the assessee

KAMLA CRAFT PACK PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 810/AHD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.810/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Kamla Craft Pack Pvt. Ltd., I.T.O, 5, Vasukanan, Nr. Lotus Flats, Vs. Ward-2(1)(2), Ashram Road, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-38001. Pan: Aaack7985K

For Appellant: Shri Hem Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Goel, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 292BSection 68

68 of Act of Rs.35,00,000/-. 6. The appellant craves liberty to add, amend, alter or modify all or any grounds of appeal before final appeal. 2. The 1st issue raised by the assessee is general in nature. Therefore we do not find any reason to adjudicate the same. Accordingly, we dismiss the ground of appeal of the assessee

BIMAL KUNJBIHARI GORAI, HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 42/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 68

145(3) and (i) made an addition of Rs. 59,90,000/- as unexplained cash credits under section 68

MOHD. NAUSHAD ANSARI (PROP. GULSAN SEV FOODS),AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 620/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Mohd Naushad Ansari The Ito, Ward-5(3)(3) Prop: Gulsan Sev Foods Vs. Anandnagar Road 51, Pujara Ni Chali Ahmedabad. Nr.Sarangpur Bridge Kamdar Medan – Gomtipur Ahmedabad 380 021 Pan: Aiwpa 6480 G (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri M.K. Patel, Ar Assessee By : Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Makarand V.Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.01.2025 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Confirming The Addition Of Rs.28,54,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer Under Section 68 Of The Act In Respect Of Cash Deposits Made In The Bank Accounts Of The Assessee During The Demonetisation Period. The Assessment Was Completed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act By The Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(3)(3), Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Assessing Officer Or Ao”], Vide Order Dated 29.12.2019. 2. Facts Of The Case 2

For Appellant: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 271ASection 68

68 of the Act and made an addition of Rs.28,54,000/- treating it as unexplained cash credit. The said amount was taxed under section 115BBE of the Act, and penalty proceedings under section 271AAC(1) were separately initiated. 3 2.3 Aggrieved by the above addition, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), NFAC. During