Search: section 68 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

5 results for “section 68”+ Section 260Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi657 Mumbai174 Calcutta136 Kolkata92 Karnataka55 Jaipur52 Chennai51 Bangalore40 Ahmedabad34 Hyderabad23 Telangana19 Nagpur17 Cochin15 Lucknow13 Raipur11 SC11 Chandigarh7 Surat7 Indore5 Amritsar5 Kerala4 Cuttack4 Visakhapatnam3 Allahabad3 Jodhpur3 Gauhati2 Punjab & Haryana2 Rajasthan2 Jabalpur1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Andhra Pradesh1 Tripura1 Uttarakhand1 Orissa1 Agra1 Patna1 Pune1

Key Topics

Section 2639 Section 143(3)8 Section 41(1)5 Section 684 Section 2(22)(e)4 Addition to Income4 Section 1483 Section 1442 Section 1472

HOSHIARPUR TRADERS ,HOSHIARPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, JALANDHAR

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

ITA 117/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

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

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

68 read with section 260A, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credits - Assessment year 1989-90 Assessing Officer

SHRI RAVINDER SACHDEVA,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -5 (4), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical

ITA 263/ASR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri. P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pardeep Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 68

68 of the Act. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the authorities below ought to have disproved the claim of the assesse by way of rebutting its contention with support of corroborative documentary evidences on record after granting an adequate opportunity of being heard. 11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court

SHRI OM PARKASH LEGAL HEIAR SMT PUSHPA VERMA,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(3), JALANDHAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 756/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 756/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 41(1)Section 41(1)(a)Section 68

260A of the Act; the assessment under reference being dated 28/02/2002, is the admission and answering substantial question/s of law arising out of the order of the Appellate Tribunal. In fact, the tribunal deleted the addition u/s. 68 not on principle, as sought to be made out by the ld. counsel during hearing, but on facts; the relevant part

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 260A, the following be subscribed:(emphasis,supplied)’ 4. In para 4.7 (in sub-para 3, beginning with the words ‘The extension of a loan/advance carries with it…….’), the following sentence at page 23: ‘When the factor of repayment of loan and advance itself is not relevant, how could the retention period, i.e., the period after which the repayment

MESERS GANESH RICE MILLS,MUKTSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

In the result the appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 287/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, A. RFor Respondent: Sh. Rohit Mehra, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250(6)

68 of the Act must only be in the hands of the M/s Vasudev Sales Corporation and not in the hands of the assessee. The assessee is maintaining regular books of accounts and such amount of sales have been recorded in the regular books of accounts. The ld. AO has only doubted the cash as deposited in the books