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.

4 results for “section 68”+ Section 195clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,127Mumbai905Karnataka460Bangalore368Chennai292Kolkata202Ahmedabad173Jaipur141Chandigarh96Hyderabad79Raipur61Calcutta51Telangana38Pune37Surat36Nagpur34Indore33Lucknow30Visakhapatnam27Cochin25Rajkot22Dehradun11SC10Allahabad9Cuttack9Jodhpur8Guwahati7Agra7Orissa5Amritsar4Rajasthan4Jabalpur4Panaji2Ranchi1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Andhra Pradesh1Uttarakhand1Varanasi1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 1489Section 2635Section 143(3)4Addition to Income4Section 250(6)3Reopening of Assessment3Section 682Section 133(6)2

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

68 but might be assessed in the individual hands of the partners, if it is permissible under section 69. ” 15. We find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A). The introduction of capital by the partner, Sh. Saurabh Gupta was already confirmed by the partner I.T.A. No. 479/Asr/2018 17 &I.T.A. No. 480/Asr/2018 himself. The addition

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

68 but might be assessed in the individual hands of the partners, if it is permissible under section 69. ” 15. We find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A). The introduction of capital by the partner, Sh. Saurabh Gupta was already confirmed by the partner I.T.A. No. 479/Asr/2018 17 &I.T.A. No. 480/Asr/2018 himself. The addition

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, FARIDKOT, BSNL BUILDING vs. M/S VOHRA SOLVEX PVT. LTD, SADIQ ROAD

In the result, C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 588/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69C

section 68 solely on basis of information received from Investigation Wing that lenders from whom assessee-company acquired loans were indulged in bogus accommodation entries, since assessee was not granted an opportunity to cross-examine persons whose statements were recorded during Investigation, Impugned addition made on basis of such investigation which was not privy to assessee were

SHRIMATI RAVINDER BAWA,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(3), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 703/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 69A

section 142(1) of the Act on 8.8.2018 and 143(2) of the Act were received. 6. During assessment proceedings, information was filed vide letters dated 05.10.2018, 09.10.2018, 30.11.2018. the information was filled by the assessee credit entry of same date in the account of the assessee includes copy of loan account showing the entry of loan amount