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.

3 results for “section 68”+ Section 153Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,757Mumbai1,761Chennai573Bangalore545Hyderabad510Jaipur490Chandigarh203Pune197Ahmedabad190Kolkata165Cochin147Indore136Visakhapatnam132Nagpur99Rajkot96Guwahati89Raipur75Amritsar59Surat50Patna47Ranchi45Allahabad44Agra34Dehradun30Lucknow26Jodhpur25Cuttack24Karnataka21Telangana9SC6Kerala5Jabalpur4Calcutta3Orissa3Gauhati2Rajasthan2Varanasi2Uttarakhand1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 26312Section 143(3)8Section 685Section 260A4Section 153A4Addition to Income3Section 10(38)2Long Term Capital Gains2Limitation/Time-bar2Condonation of Delay

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S TECHNO TRACOM PVT LTD

ITAT/67/2023HC Calcutta27 Mar 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 27Th March, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. ...For The Appellant Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv. Mr. Anil Dugar, Adv. ...For The Respondent. The Court : There Is A Delay Of 168 Days In Filing The Appeal. We Have Heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, Learned Counsel For The Appellant & Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Counsel For The Respondent & Perused The Averments Set Out In The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Application For Condonation. We Find Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Not Preferring The Appeal Within The Period Of Limitation.

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154ASection 260ASection 263Section 68

68 of the Act ? (ii) Whether the Learned Tribunal has erred in ignoring the discussion and findings rendered by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax in his order under Section 263 of the Act ? We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standing counsel for the appellant/revenue and Mr. J.P. Khaitan, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala

2

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 KOLKATA vs. SHRI SAWANKUMAR T JAJOO

Accordingly, the appeal fails and dismissed

ITAT/271/2024HC Calcutta17 Jan 2025

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 260ASection 68

68 of the IT Act, 1961 in the order u/s. 143(3) read with section 153A even though the decision

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9,KOLKATA vs. MANJU OSATWAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and

ITAT/96/2021HC Calcutta11 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

For Appellant: Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Swapna Das, Adv
Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 180Section 182Section 260ASection 263

68 of the Income Tax Act or not? 6. We have heard Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, learned standing Counsel for the appellant and Ms. Swapna Das and Mr. Siddharth Das, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee. 7. As an interesting question of law arises for consideration in this appeal, we requested Mr. J.P. Khaitan, learned senior counsel to assist