Search: section 68

6 results for “section 68”+ Section 246Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 271A12 Addition to Income6 Section 69A5 Section 153A4 Section 158B4 Section 1324 Section 271(1)(c)3 Penalty3 Disallowance3 Unexplained Investment

SHREENATH DEVELOPERS,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(5), VADODARA

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

ITA 909/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Prashant Upadhyay, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR

Section 68Section 69A

68,00,000/- was actually made in the Financial Year 2017-18 and is duly reflected in the bank statement for that year. Accordingly, it was submitted that Ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed the additions without discussing the facts of the case, the issues for consideration and summarily dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non-appearance, without giving

SHRI NAGIN A VAGHELA,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for A

SHREENATH DEVELOPERS,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(5), VADODARA

SHRI NAGIN A VAGHELA,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, VADODARA

SHREENATH DEVELOPERS,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(5), VADODARA

SHRI NAGIN A VAGHELA,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, VADODARA

SHRI NAGIN A VAGHELA,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, VADODARA

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. PINAC STOCK BROKERS PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SUNIT SUDHIRBHAI CHOKSHI, AHMEDABAD

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1) , AHMEDABAD vs. SUNIT SUDHIRBHAI CHOKSHI, AHMEDABAD