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.

2 results for “section 68”+ Section 144C(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai769Delhi638Bangalore287Ahmedabad91Hyderabad69Pune69Kolkata69Chennai50Chandigarh21Jaipur20Dehradun17Indore15Surat9Cuttack6Rajkot6Visakhapatnam5Karnataka4Cochin3Raipur3SC2Amritsar2Jodhpur1Guwahati1Lucknow1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)3Section 92C3Section 80I3Section 803Section 144C(5)2Section 144C(13)2Deduction2Addition to Income2

SATIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUKTSAR, PUNJAB vs. DCIT, ACIT CIRCLE 1, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 527/ASR/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 527/Asr/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: S/Shri Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Shri K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 80

144C(5) is bad in law since, the DRP had erred on facts and in law in affirming the draft assessment order by passing a cryptic and non-speaking order, without judiciously considering the entire material and the submissions / objections filed by the assessee. 2. That the AO has erred in fact and in lawin confirming the sales value

SATIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUKTSAR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE I, BATHINDA, BATHINDA

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

ITA 702/ASR/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Kapoor, Adv. &
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(2)Section 144C(5)Section 80Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

3) dated 30/10/2023 are tabulated below: 6. The objections raised by the assessee are as follows: “1. The TPO failed to consider that electricity and steam are generated using biomass fuel, and that PSERC has specifically fixed the tariff for biomass-based projects at 8.75 per kWh. 4 I.T.A. No. 702/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 ii. There was no justification