Search: section 68 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

183 results for “section 68”+ Section 156clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi888 Mumbai590 Karnataka466 Bangalore330 Ahmedabad183 Jaipur178 Hyderabad141 Chennai139 Kolkata118 Raipur96 Cochin84 Chandigarh76 Indore59 Pune58 Calcutta54 Panaji41 Surat40 Telangana32 Lucknow28 Nagpur26 Cuttack22 Allahabad21 SC20 Rajkot18 Visakhapatnam13 Amritsar12 Varanasi9 Guwahati7 Ranchi6 Agra5 Rajasthan5 Dehradun4 Orissa3 Jodhpur2 Jabalpur2 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Andhra Pradesh1 Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 6846 Section 14A46 Addition to Income45 Section 80I42 Section 14835 Section 13231 Section 143(3)27 Section 143(2)26 Section 14725 Disallowance

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

section 68 could be made. Again, in PCIT v. Ojas Tarmake Pvt. Ltd. (156 taxmann.com 75), it was held

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 Ahmedabad18 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

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

Showing 1–20 of 183 · Page 1 of 10

...

23

Section 250Section 68

section 68 could be made. Again, in PCIT v. Ojas Tarmake Pvt. Ltd. (156 taxmann.com 75), it was held

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

section 68 could be made. Again, in PCIT v. Ojas Tarmake Pvt. Ltd. (156 taxmann.com 75), it was held

JHAVERI TRADING AND INVESTMENT PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENT. CIR. 1(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 401/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 401 To 403/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2012-2013 To 2014-2015) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 399 & 400/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2010-2011 & 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT.DR

Section 132(4)Section 68

section 68 of the Act, we note that the Revenue has not challenged the submission of the assessee that such borrowing has been repaid to the companies. In this respect, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rohini builders reported in 256 ITR 360 wherein

JHAVERI TRADING AND INVESTMENT PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENT. CIR. 1(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 400/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 401 To 403/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2012-2013 To 2014-2015) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 399 & 400/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2010-2011 & 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT.DR

Section 132(4)Section 68

section 68 of the Act, we note that the Revenue has not challenged the submission of the assessee that such borrowing has been repaid to the companies. In this respect, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rohini builders reported in 256 ITR 360 wherein

JHAVERI TRADING AND INVESTMENT PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENT. CIR. 1(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 399/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 401 To 403/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2012-2013 To 2014-2015) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 399 & 400/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2010-2011 & 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT.DR

Section 132(4)Section 68

section 68 of the Act, we note that the Revenue has not challenged the submission of the assessee that such borrowing has been repaid to the companies. In this respect, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rohini builders reported in 256 ITR 360 wherein

JHAVERI TRADING AND INVESTMENT PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENT. CIR. 1(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 403/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 401 To 403/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2012-2013 To 2014-2015) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 399 & 400/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2010-2011 & 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT.DR

Section 132(4)Section 68

section 68 of the Act, we note that the Revenue has not challenged the submission of the assessee that such borrowing has been repaid to the companies. In this respect, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rohini builders reported in 256 ITR 360 wherein

JHAVERI TRADING AND INVESTMENT PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENT. CIR. 1(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 402/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 401 To 403/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2012-2013 To 2014-2015) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 399 & 400/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2010-2011 & 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT.DR

Section 132(4)Section 68

section 68 of the Act, we note that the Revenue has not challenged the submission of the assessee that such borrowing has been repaid to the companies. In this respect, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rohini builders reported in 256 ITR 360 wherein

M/S. PUSHPAK BULLION PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1771/AHD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Jurisdictional High Court & The Hon’Ble Gujarat High Court Dismissed The Writ Petition Filed By The Assessee Vide Judgment Dated 27-06-2016 In Sca No. 18512 Of 2015 & Upheld The Validity Of The Reassessment Notice.

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

section 68 on the facts of the case.” 5. Heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record including Paper Book filed by the assessee. The technical grounds raised by the assessee on reopening of assessment, reasons recorded are already decided by the Jurisdictional High Court vide its judgment dated

NIKULBHAI CHATURBHAI PATEL, HUF,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 45/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR & Shri HargovindFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR & Shri Hargovind

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69

156 taxmann.com 75 (Gujarat), the Gujarat High Court held that where assessee showed unsecured loans received during relevant assessment year and AO made addition on ground that assessee failed to discharge onus of liability as laid down under section 68

INCOME TAX WARD 4(2)(3) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. NIKULBHAI CHATURBHAI PATEL HUF, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 267/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR & Shri HargovindFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR & Shri Hargovind

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69

156 taxmann.com 75 (Gujarat), the Gujarat High Court held that where assessee showed unsecured loans received during relevant assessment year and AO made addition on ground that assessee failed to discharge onus of liability as laid down under section 68

INCOME TAX WARD 4(2)(3) AHMEDABAD , AHMEDABAD vs. NIKULBHAI CHATURBHAI PATEL HUF, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 266/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR & Shri HargovindFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR & Shri Hargovind

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69

156 taxmann.com 75 (Gujarat), the Gujarat High Court held that where assessee showed unsecured loans received during relevant assessment year and AO made addition on ground that assessee failed to discharge onus of liability as laid down under section 68

NIKULBHAI CHATURBHAI PATEL, HUF,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 47/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR & Shri HargovindFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR & Shri Hargovind

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69

156 taxmann.com 75 (Gujarat), the Gujarat High Court held that where assessee showed unsecured loans received during relevant assessment year and AO made addition on ground that assessee failed to discharge onus of liability as laid down under section 68

NIKULBHAI CHATURBHAI PATEL, HUF,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 46/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR & Shri HargovindFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR & Shri Hargovind

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69

156 taxmann.com 75 (Gujarat), the Gujarat High Court held that where assessee showed unsecured loans received during relevant assessment year and AO made addition on ground that assessee failed to discharge onus of liability as laid down under section 68

M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-12,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3048/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Shri Parin

Section 23Section 251Section 271Section 69C

156 Taxman 507/205 CTR 444, where it was held as under: The Tribunal had recorded a categorical finding of fact based on appreciation of materials and evidence on record that the said amounts represented the purchases made by the assessee on credit and, therefore, the provisions of section 68

M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCEL-7(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 127/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Shri Parin

Section 23Section 251Section 271Section 69C

156 Taxman 507/205 CTR 444, where it was held as under: The Tribunal had recorded a categorical finding of fact based on appreciation of materials and evidence on record that the said amounts represented the purchases made by the assessee on credit and, therefore, the provisions of section 68

THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3336/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Shri Parin

Section 23Section 251Section 271Section 69C

156 Taxman 507/205 CTR 444, where it was held as under: The Tribunal had recorded a categorical finding of fact based on appreciation of materials and evidence on record that the said amounts represented the purchases made by the assessee on credit and, therefore, the provisions of section 68

M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCEL-7(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 128/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Shri Parin

Section 23Section 251Section 271Section 69C

156 Taxman 507/205 CTR 444, where it was held as under: The Tribunal had recorded a categorical finding of fact based on appreciation of materials and evidence on record that the said amounts represented the purchases made by the assessee on credit and, therefore, the provisions of section 68

M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,,AHMEDABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,VII,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 844/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Shri Parin

Section 23Section 251Section 271Section 69C

156 Taxman 507/205 CTR 444, where it was held as under: The Tribunal had recorded a categorical finding of fact based on appreciation of materials and evidence on record that the said amounts represented the purchases made by the assessee on credit and, therefore, the provisions of section 68

M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCEL-7(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 126/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Shri Parin

Section 23Section 251Section 271Section 69C

156 Taxman 507/205 CTR 444, where it was held as under: The Tribunal had recorded a categorical finding of fact based on appreciation of materials and evidence on record that the said amounts represented the purchases made by the assessee on credit and, therefore, the provisions of section 68