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.

229 results for “section 68”+ Section 158clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,099Mumbai654Karnataka471Ahmedabad229Jaipur172Bangalore126Chandigarh119Hyderabad113Chennai110Kolkata91Cochin89Indore67Raipur54Surat52Pune49Telangana35Lucknow30Allahabad26Calcutta19Rajkot18Jodhpur17Ranchi16Cuttack15Amritsar13SC13Nagpur9Agra7Rajasthan5Varanasi5Guwahati4Panaji4Patna3Orissa2Visakhapatnam2Uttarakhand2Jabalpur1Punjab & Haryana1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 14855Addition to Income53Section 13241Disallowance24Section 14723Section 143(3)22Section 2(15)20Deduction20Section 80I18Depreciation

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. STHAPATYA SHILP CONSTRUCTION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 907/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 907/Ahd/2019 With C.O.No.170/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 D.C.I.T., M/S. Sthapatya Shilp Construction, Central Circle-1(2), Vs. 2, Abhiraj Complex, Ahmedabad. 68-B, Swastic Society, Ahmedabad. Pan: Abffs2922P

For Appellant: Ms Nupur Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT,D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 68

section 68 of the Act. 24. The learned CIT(A) after considering the submission of the assessee deleted the addition made by the AO by observing as under: The AO in Para 8.1.1 of the assessment order observed that the appellant has not submitted all the details in support of its claim. Thereafter in para

Showing 1–20 of 229 · Page 1 of 12

...
18
Section 115J16
Section 69A15

SHRI PRAVINCHANDRA R PATEL,VADODARA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA

ITA 299/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jan 2022AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69BSection 69C

68 to 69D of the Act. As such, it is the onus of the revenue to bring out the necessary evidence to hold that the assessee has made investments in the impugned land which is unexplained under the provisions of section 69B of the Act. Likewise, the contents of the email having attachments of page 157 and 158

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA vs. NEOTECH EDUCATION FOUNDATION, VADODARA

ITA 194/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jan 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69BSection 69C

68 to 69D of the Act. As such, it is the onus of the revenue to bring out the necessary evidence to hold that the assessee has made investments in the impugned land which is unexplained under the provisions of section 69B of the Act. Likewise, the contents of the email having attachments of page 157 and 158

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA vs. NEOTECH EDUCATION FOUNDATION, VADODARA

ITA 195/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jan 2022AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69BSection 69C

68 to 69D of the Act. As such, it is the onus of the revenue to bring out the necessary evidence to hold that the assessee has made investments in the impugned land which is unexplained under the provisions of section 69B of the Act. Likewise, the contents of the email having attachments of page 157 and 158

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

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCEL-7(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3448/AHD/2016[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

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

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

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

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

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

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

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

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

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

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

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

FIREFLY ENERGY LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 2871/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 2871/Ahd/2016 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Firefly Energy Limited, Income Tax Officer, 14. Pahelgaon Bunglow, Vs. Ward-2(1)(3), Judges Bungalow Road, Ahmedabad. Vastrapura, Ahmedabad. C/O. Mehta Lodha & Co. Chartered Accountants, 105, Sakar-1, Near Gandhi Gram Rly. Station, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aabca6692E

For Appellant: Shri PD Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT. DR
Section 143(2)Section 68

section 143(2) of the Act, has not been issued by the assessing officer who has jurisdiction over the assessee and therefore the order passed by the learned AO is required to be quashed. 4. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel before us submitted that he has been instructed not to press the additional ground of appeal raised

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

68,655/- with respect to these cars namely Audi-A4 and BMW and added to the total income of the assessee. 14. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal to the learned CIT-A. The assessee before the learned CIT-A has filed the duplicate copies of the invoices for the purchase of 5 cars but the assessee has not filed

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

68,655/- with respect to these cars namely Audi-A4 and BMW and added to the total income of the assessee. 14. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal to the learned CIT-A. The assessee before the learned CIT-A has filed the duplicate copies of the invoices for the purchase of 5 cars but the assessee has not filed

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

68,655/- with respect to these cars namely Audi-A4 and BMW and added to the total income of the assessee. 14. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal to the learned CIT-A. The assessee before the learned CIT-A has filed the duplicate copies of the invoices for the purchase of 5 cars but the assessee has not filed

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

68,655/- with respect to these cars namely Audi-A4 and BMW and added to the total income of the assessee. 14. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal to the learned CIT-A. The assessee before the learned CIT-A has filed the duplicate copies of the invoices for the purchase of 5 cars but the assessee has not filed

AANYA DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2069/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Pipara, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 44Section 44ASection 68

section 68 of the Act. He further observed that the assessee has alleged payment of interest on these loans which were termed as bogus, therefore, the expenses claimed in the shape of interest deserves to be disallowed. He disallowed such interest expenditure and made addition of Rs.3,01,277/-. 5. Dissatisfied with the additions, the assessee carried the matter

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR vs. LEELA NEWS NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR, GUJARAT

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

ITA 1714/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

section 133(6) of the Act was issued to M/s VRR Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., which were duly responded by it. The identity of the parties could not be, therefore disputed. The entire amount advanced by the M/s VRR Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. was through banking channels, this fact has been made part of the assessment order

SHRI RAVINDRASINH N.GOHIL,,BHAVNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE,WARD-1(1),, BHAVNAGAR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 3344/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Rastogi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Section 68 creates a legal fiction whereby cash credits received are deemed to be unexplained for want of necessary evidences and consequently addition is made u/s.68. He further submitted that when addition is made by invoking legal fiction it is not necessary that penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) should also be levied. Ld. ITA Nos.3343 & 3344/Ahd/2015 Shri Ravindrasinh

SHRI RAVINDRASINH N.GOHIL,,BHAVNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE,WARD-1(1),, BHAVNAGAR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 3343/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Rastogi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Section 68 creates a legal fiction whereby cash credits received are deemed to be unexplained for want of necessary evidences and consequently addition is made u/s.68. He further submitted that when addition is made by invoking legal fiction it is not necessary that penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) should also be levied. Ld. ITA Nos.3343 & 3344/Ahd/2015 Shri Ravindrasinh