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.

47 results for “section 68”+ Section 115clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,181Mumbai1,007Karnataka514Bangalore339Ahmedabad244Jaipur210Chennai197Hyderabad145Chandigarh135Kolkata114Pune91Cochin89Indore83Surat71Calcutta56Raipur53Amritsar47Telangana42Cuttack40Guwahati39Visakhapatnam35Rajkot29Nagpur29Ranchi28Lucknow27SC14Allahabad12Varanasi8Jodhpur8Agra7Panaji6Jabalpur6Patna6Rajasthan5Dehradun5Orissa4Andhra Pradesh1Uttarakhand1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 153A54Section 14753Section 14829Section 14429Section 26325Section 69A20Addition to Income16Section 250(6)15Section 115B15Survey u/s 133A

M/S SANT BABA BHAG SINGH MEMORIAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY,JALANDHAR vs. D.C.I.T, CIRCLE - 1 (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 432/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 432/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 12ASection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

68 or section 69 or section 69A or section 69B or section 69C or section 69D. 115

Showing 1–20 of 47 · Page 1 of 3

11
Cash Deposit5
Unexplained Cash Credit3

SMT HARNEET KAUR JUNEJA,JALANDHAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 66/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

115 BBE is to be charged on total income as referred to in Sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C or 69D and reflected

SHRI SUKHJIT SINGH,HOSHIARPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 67/ASR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

115 BBE is to be charged on total income as referred to in Sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C or 69D and reflected

SHRI MANMOHAN SINGH KAPUR,HOSHIARPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 68/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

115 BBE is to be charged on total income as referred to in Sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C or 69D and reflected

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 1 (2), BATHINDA vs. MESERS SHREE BHAGWATI COTTON TRADERS ,, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 479/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)Section 68

115/- is deleted.” 10. The ld. Counsel further relied on the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT, Surat-1 vs. TejuaRohitkumar Kapadia, (2018) 94 taxmann.com325 (SC) held: I.T.A. No. 479/Asr/2018 13 &I.T.A. No. 480/Asr/2018 “Section 69C of the income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained expenditure (Bogus purchases) -Assessing Officer had disallowed some expenditure treating purchases

MESERS SHREE BHAGWATI COTTON TRADERS,BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 1 (2), BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 480/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)Section 68

115/- is deleted.” 10. The ld. Counsel further relied on the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT, Surat-1 vs. TejuaRohitkumar Kapadia, (2018) 94 taxmann.com325 (SC) held: I.T.A. No. 479/Asr/2018 13 &I.T.A. No. 480/Asr/2018 “Section 69C of the income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained expenditure (Bogus purchases) -Assessing Officer had disallowed some expenditure treating purchases

M/S G G OILS & FATS PVT.LTD ,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BATHINDA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 508/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar05 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 508/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora &For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 2(18)Section 2(22)(e)Section 56

section 115-O;’ It is thus only the dividend declared, distributed or paid by a company, on which tax u/s. 115-O has been suffered, that falls u/s. 10(34), and would therefore not stand to be assessed u/s. 2(24)(ii) r/w s. 56 of the Act. The said dividend would only be that envisaged

MESERS AXON LABORATORIES,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -3 , HOSHIARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assesse in ITANo

ITA 316/ASR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 115BSection 133ASection 142(1)Section 158BSection 68Section 69

68 & 69 r.w s. 158BBE have been wrongly invoked by the Id.CIT(A) resulting into illegal ennunccmcnt of income/demand. 5.That the order under appeal, is liable to be Sf. aside being contrary to Iacts and fdWas also the principles of natural justice. 3. Ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to the paper book containing 35 pages. He also

SH. ARSPREET SINGH . S/O. LATE. SH. GURMAIL SINGH ,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE .II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 61/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

SH. ARASHPREET SINGH S/O LATE SH. GURMAIL SINGH,SHRI MUKATSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 60/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

LATE. SH. GURMAIL. SINGH S/O. SH. LAL SINGH,SHRI MUKAT SAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF 9INCOME TAX. CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 56/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

LATE. SH. GURMAIL SINGH S/O. SH. LAL SINGH,SRI MUKATSAR vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 59/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

SH. ARASHPREET SINGH. S/O.LATE.SH. GURMAIL SINGH,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 64/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

LATE. SH. GUMAIL SINGH . S/O. SH. LAL SINGH,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 55/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

LATE. SH. GURMAIL. SINGH. S/O. SH. LAL SINGH,SRI MUKATSAR vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 58/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

SH. ARASHPREET SINGH S/O. LATE SH. GURMAIL SINGH,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CERCLE- II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 62/ASR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

LATE. SH. GURMAIL SINGH.S/O. LATE SH. LAL SINGH,SRI MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 57/ASR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

SH. ARASHPREET SINGH S/O. LATE SH. GURMAIL SINGH,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 63/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

SHRI GURBINDER SINGH MAHAL,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-IV ( 2), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 22/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 144Section 144oSection 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 250o

section 250(4)] through banks instead of disposing off the appeal for non-appearance without adjudicating on merits. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, or alter any of the grounds of appeal.” I.T.A. No.22/Asr/2023 4 Assessment Year: 2014-15 2. The case was called for hearing, first, the ld. DR filed an adjournment petition before the bench

SHRI KASHMIRA SINGH,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the particular issue u/s 153C of the Act related in ITA

ITA 276/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 144Section 153A

68 and Bengal Immunity Company Ltd. v. State of Bihar, [1955] 2 SCR 603, relied upon (10). The doctrine of ratio decidendi has also to be interpreted in the same line. To consider the ratio decidendi Court has to ascertain the principle on which the case was decided. The ratio decidendi of a decision may be narrowed or widened