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.

2,563 results for “section 68”+ Section 68clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi10,878 Mumbai9,574 Kolkata3,169 Bangalore2,563 Ahmedabad2,240 Chennai2,150 Jaipur1,536 Hyderabad1,403 Pune1,336 Surat946 Chandigarh908 Karnataka811 Indore807 Cochin642 Rajkot472 Raipur460 Visakhapatnam400 Lucknow311 Nagpur277 Amritsar273 Agra251 Cuttack243 Guwahati235 Calcutta180 Telangana168 Ranchi153 Patna147 Jodhpur140 SC132 Jabalpur120 Panaji109 Dehradun106 Allahabad104 Varanasi50 Rajasthan22 Orissa15 Kerala13 Punjab & Haryana7 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN5 Uttarakhand4 Gauhati3 Andhra Pradesh2 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI2 ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1 K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1 Himachal Pradesh1 Tripura1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 HARJIT SINGH BEDI CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD1 ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1

Key Topics

Addition to Income67 Section 143(3)55 Section 153A37 Section 6837 Section 14829 Section 153C26 Section 25024 Section 201(1)24 Section 13223 Disallowance

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. VASTIMAL BHIM RAJ SANCHETI, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 441/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth GS, ARFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

section 68 og the Act. resultantly , Rs.8.31 Crore under section 68 of the Act was added

MR. MOHAMMED HANIF MOHAMMED YUSUF DHARWADKAR,HUBLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), HUBLI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 135/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore

Showing 1–20 of 2,563 · Page 1 of 129

...

21

25 Jul 2023

AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Prathibha R., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Veera Raghavan, D.R

Section 147Section 234ASection 68

section 68 of the Act. Under section 68 of the Act, it is only when an amount

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. AURA JEWELS, BANGALORE

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 684/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Years : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)

Section 143(2)Section 68

section 68 does not apply to trading receipts. Section 68 cannot be invoked where the sum found

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1-(4), BENGALURU vs. M/S KANSUR DEVELOPERS INDIA PVT. LTD., BENGALURU

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1441/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept

section 68 or section 69. Under section 5(2) the income accruing or arising outside India

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), BENGALURU vs. M/S KANSUR DEVELOPERS INDIA PVT. LTD. , BENGALURU

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1442/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept

section 68 or section 69. Under section 5(2) the income accruing or arising outside India

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), BENGALURU vs. M/S SNOWSHINE REALTORS PVT.LTD. , BENGALURU

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1443/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept

section 68 or section 69. Under section 5(2) the income accruing or arising outside India

BHUWALKA SALES CORPORATION,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10 is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1436/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Apr 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P. Boazi.T. A. No.1436/Bang/2013 (Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/S. Bhuwalka Sales Corporation, No.5, Walker Lane, Bhuwalka Landmark, Langford Road, Richmond Town, Bangalore-560 025 …. Appellant. Pan Aaifb 0063G Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Bangalore. ….. Respondent. Appellant By : Shri K. Seshadri, C.A. Respondent By : Shri P. Dhivahar, Jcit (D.R). Date Of Hearing : 2.2.2015. Date Of Pronouncement : 1.4.2015. O R D E R Per Shri Jason P. Boaz, A.M. : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Bangalore Dt.12.8.2013 For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Facts Of The Case, Briefly, Are As Under :- 2.1 The Assessee, In The Business Of Trading In Rolled Products, Filed The Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2009-10 On 26.9.2009 Declaring Income Of Rs.49,25,026. The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short 'The Act') & The Case Was Taken Up For Scrutiny. The Assessment Was Completed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act Vide

For Appellant: Shri K. Seshadri, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, JCIT (D.R)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

SECTION 68 Learned CIT (Appeals) erred in invoking section 68 with respect to the credit of Rs.1.25

SMT.MANJUSHREE,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 374/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri P. Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT (D.R)

Section 68. Therefore the Hon'ble High Court though made an observation that in case Section 68

ARJUN SHETTY,MANGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TPS, CIRCLE - 1(1), MANGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 61/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri.Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2018-19 Arjun Shetty, Vs. Ito, 16-6-393/9 Shubha Krishna Building, Ward – Tps, Highland Falnir, Mangalore - 575002. Circle – 1(1), Pan :Ainps5294H Mangalore. Appellant Respondent Assessee By : S/Shri. Pranav G Ambekar, V. Narendra Sharma, Advocates Revenue By : Shri. Nilanjan Dey,Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2025

For Appellant: S/Shri. Pranav G Ambekar, V. Narendra Sharma, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. Nilanjan Dey,JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 10Section 10(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

section 68 of the Act was not fulfilled. The order is bad in law as section 68

SHRI. SHANTHISAGAR CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,HUBLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), HUBLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2081/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Harsha J, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate – Standing

Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

section 68 of the Act is misplaced. In our considered view the provision of section 68 of the Act is invoked

VISHWANATHAREDDY CHENNAREDDY,BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(7), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 900/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI (Accountant Member), SMT. BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Hemasundara Rao P., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., D.R

Section 250Section 251Section 68Section 69A

section 68 to section 69A of the Act regarding the impugned cash deposits. This is in contravention

SMT.ASHA SURENDRA KUMAR,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 343/BANG/2017[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Apr 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri P. Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT (D.R)

Section 254(2)Section 68

Section 68. Therefore the decision of Hon'ble High Court though made an observation that in case Section

SRI. GIRISH MALLESH,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 837/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashwin D Gowda, D.R

Section 115BSection 142Section 143Section 250Section 271ASection 44ASection 68

section 68 of the Act. It has been provided under section 68 of the Act that

SRI. GIRISH MALLESH,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 836/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashwin D Gowda, D.R

Section 115BSection 142Section 143Section 250Section 271ASection 44ASection 68

section 68 of the Act. It has been provided under section 68 of the Act that

C.K. RAMAKRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10 is dismissed

ITA 550/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2015AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Raghavendra Chakravarthi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Yadav, CIT (D.R)

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 68Section 69

Section 68 of the Act, in as much as the said section applies ony in the case

M/S DAVALAGIRI PROPERTY DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 568/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 133(6)Section 234Section 68

section 68 of the assessee company. (2) CIT v. Stellar Investment Ltd. [2001] 115 Taxman 99 (SC) : It was held

MR. P. NARASIMHA RAO,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1(1) & TPS, MANGALURU

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

ITA 840/BANG/2022[201-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 May 2023

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2012 – 13

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

section 68 of the Act. Section 68:- "Where any sum is found credited in the books

M P SWARNAMAHAL ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-7(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1106/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. M. P. Swarnamahal, Vs. Acit, 26 H J S Chambers, Richmond Road, Circle – 7(2)(1), Bangalore – 560 025, Karnataka. Bangalore. Pan : Aagfm 2876 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Suman Lunkar, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Subramanian S, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 04.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.11.2025

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

section 68 does not have any overriding effect. The provisions of section 68 do not contain

M/S.CORNERSSTONE PROPERTY INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, BANGALORE

ITA 665/BANG/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Nagendra Prasad,CIT (D.R)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Section 68 indicates that the said section is very widely worded and an Income-tax Officer is not precluded

M/S. CRYSTAL GRANITE AND MARBLE PRIVATE LIMITED,RAMANAGARAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and Stay Petition is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 405/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.P No.29/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajgopal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Vidya K, JCIT (DR)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

68 when all ingredients contemplated under section 68 had been duly satisfied on aspect of identity of creditors