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.

135 results for “section 68”+ Section 253(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai778Delhi705Karnataka456Ahmedabad156Bangalore135Jaipur129Chandigarh109Indore102Chennai100Kolkata79Surat53Lucknow52Pune51Hyderabad42Cochin41Rajkot36Allahabad31Amritsar28Guwahati25Patna19Calcutta17Nagpur16Agra14SC14Raipur13Jodhpur12Varanasi11Panaji10Visakhapatnam9Ranchi8Telangana6Rajasthan3Cuttack3Uttarakhand2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Orissa1Andhra Pradesh1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Addition to Income75Section 143(3)47Disallowance45Section 1134Section 14A31Section 13230Deduction30Section 6827Section 36(1)(iii)26Section 2(15)

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. M/S. BANGALORE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result both the appeals of the Revenue as well as\nCos of the Assessee for the Asst

ITA 2347/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

4 of CO and Ground No. 2 of Department's\nappeal : Disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961.\n\n13.1 The ld. A.R. submitted that the interest income from\ninvestments in various co-operative societies and banks are entitled\nfor deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The details of the interest

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

ITA 846/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore

Showing 1–20 of 135 · Page 1 of 7

25
Section 4025
Exemption17
24 Jul 2024
AY 2015-16

68,805 5 2014-2015 3,39,72,356 6 2015-2016 4,03,73,597 Total 15,10,05,646 14.1 She submitted that the assessee company has offered a sum of Rs.2,23,19,384/- in its return of income as admitted during the search. From above it is clear case of concealment of income by the assessee

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 840/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

253 of the Act. There appears to be no justification for cutting Date of Order 07-11-2017 W.P.Nos.24646-24651/2015 Prathiba Jewellery House Vs. The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) & Ors., short that regular remedy at this stage and to entertain these writ petitions on merits.” 15.1 Being so, this ground in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 847/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

253 of the Act. There appears to be no justification for cutting Date of Order 07-11-2017 W.P.Nos.24646-24651/2015 Prathiba Jewellery House Vs. The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) & Ors., short that regular remedy at this stage and to entertain these writ petitions on merits.” 15.1 Being so, this ground in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 841/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

253 of the Act. There appears to be no justification for cutting Date of Order 07-11-2017 W.P.Nos.24646-24651/2015 Prathiba Jewellery House Vs. The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) & Ors., short that regular remedy at this stage and to entertain these writ petitions on merits.” 15.1 Being so, this ground in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment

JOHN DEVELOPERS,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 845/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

253 of the Act. There appears to be no justification for cutting Date of Order 07-11-2017 W.P.Nos.24646-24651/2015 Prathiba Jewellery House Vs. The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) & Ors., short that regular remedy at this stage and to entertain these writ petitions on merits.” 15.1 Being so, this ground in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 987/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

253 of the Act. There appears to be no justification for cutting Date of Order 07-11-2017 W.P.Nos.24646-24651/2015 Prathiba Jewellery House Vs. The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) & Ors., short that regular remedy at this stage and to entertain these writ petitions on merits.” 15.1 Being so, this ground in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 838/BANG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

253 of the Act. There appears to be no justification for cutting Date of Order 07-11-2017 W.P.Nos.24646-24651/2015 Prathiba Jewellery House Vs. The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) & Ors., short that regular remedy at this stage and to entertain these writ petitions on merits.” 15.1 Being so, this ground in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 839/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

253 of the Act. There appears to be no justification for cutting Date of Order 07-11-2017 W.P.Nos.24646-24651/2015 Prathiba Jewellery House Vs. The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) & Ors., short that regular remedy at this stage and to entertain these writ petitions on merits.” 15.1 Being so, this ground in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(1), BENGALURU, BANGALORE vs. M/S. BANGALORE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED , BANGALORE

ITA 2348/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 250

4 of CO and Ground No. 2 of Department’s appeal : Disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 13.1 The ld. A.R. submitted that the interest income from investments in various co-operative societies and banks are entitled for deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The details of the interest

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

ITA 986/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sri T.M. Shivakumar

253 of the Act. There appears to be no justification\nfor cutting Date of Order 07-11-2017 W.P.Nos.24646-24651/2015 Prathiba\nJewellery House Vs. The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) & Ors., short\nthat regular remedy at this stage and to entertain these writ petitions on merits.”\n15.1 Being so, this ground in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023

MOHAMMED MUJEEB SIKANDER,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE (1), MANGALORE

ITA 1117/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Shivakumar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, D.R
Section 1Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)(a)Section 68Section 69B

68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act being amount standing in the name of Seahath Marine Products. 2.2 Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2 Panaji [CIT(A)] on 27.01.2020 raising the following grounds: i. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. AO erred

MOHAMMED MUJEEB SIKANDER,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE (1), MANGALORE

ITA 1119/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Shivakumar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, D.R
Section 1Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)(a)Section 68Section 69B

68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act being amount standing in the name of Seahath Marine Products. 2.2 Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2 Panaji [CIT(A)] on 27.01.2020 raising the following grounds: i. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. AO erred

SRI C ASWATHANARAYANA ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed on the additional grounds raised for assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10

ITA 2584/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.2583 & 2584/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 132(4)Section 271Section 271A

68,76,382 2007-08 4,69,13,969 2008-09 3,24,72,389 2009-10 2,35,10,690 Total 17,09,22,366 6.6 Ld.AO observed that, the assessee would not have surrendered monies for the years under consideration, had the search and seizure operation not taken place. The Ld.AO initiated proceeding for imposition of penalty under

SRI C ASWATHANARAYANA ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed on the additional grounds raised for assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10

ITA 2583/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.2583 & 2584/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 132(4)Section 271Section 271A

68,76,382 2007-08 4,69,13,969 2008-09 3,24,72,389 2009-10 2,35,10,690 Total 17,09,22,366 6.6 Ld.AO observed that, the assessee would not have surrendered monies for the years under consideration, had the search and seizure operation not taken place. The Ld.AO initiated proceeding for imposition of penalty under

YOKOGAWA INDIA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1715/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AOvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 143Section 144Section 234BSection 253

253 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 ("Act") against the order passed on 28.01 .2016 under Section 143 (3) read with Section 144 C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Large Taxpayers Unit, Circle - 1, Bangalore ("AO") (hereinafter referred to as the Impugned Order) in pursuance of the directions issued by Dispute

MRS. IBRAHIM KALEEL,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 733/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)

253/- 2017-18 2,11,47,366/- 2018-19 1,48,25,791/- 2.6 As per seized material, assessee had received Rs.6,88,95,000/- through bank and Rs.3,94,55,000/- as cash from Creek Developers and Builders as on 22.3.2016 and expenditure upto 22.3.2016 are recorded in page 102 of the seized material and AO worked out these

EMKAY HINDUSTAN INFRASTRUCTURE,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 980/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)

253/- 2017-18 2,11,47,366/- 2018-19 1,48,25,791/- 2.6 As per seized material, assessee had received Rs.6,88,95,000/- through bank and Rs.3,94,55,000/- as cash from Creek Developers and Builders as on 22.3.2016 and expenditure upto 22.3.2016 are recorded in page 102 of the seized material and AO worked out these

MRS. IBRAHIM KALEEL,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 734/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)

253/- 2017-18 2,11,47,366/- 2018-19 1,48,25,791/- 2.6 As per seized material, assessee had received Rs.6,88,95,000/- through bank and Rs.3,94,55,000/- as cash from Creek Developers and Builders as on 22.3.2016 and expenditure upto 22.3.2016 are recorded in page 102 of the seized material and AO worked out these

EMKAY HINDUSTAN INFRASTRUCTURE,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 981/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)

253/- 2017-18 2,11,47,366/- 2018-19 1,48,25,791/- 2.6 As per seized material, assessee had received Rs.6,88,95,000/- through bank and Rs.3,94,55,000/- as cash from Creek Developers and Builders as on 22.3.2016 and expenditure upto 22.3.2016 are recorded in page 102 of the seized material and AO worked out these