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.

376 results for “section 68”+ Cash Depositclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi3,435 Mumbai2,805 Kolkata929 Chennai868 Ahmedabad845 Jaipur775 Bangalore724 Hyderabad586 Chandigarh376 Pune374 Indore308 Surat303 Rajkot234 Visakhapatnam223 Cochin207 Nagpur145 Raipur140 Lucknow131 Amritsar122 Karnataka121 Cuttack89 Agra79 Patna65 Jodhpur61 Allahabad61 Guwahati59 Calcutta48 Panaji48 Jabalpur33 Dehradun32 Telangana27 Varanasi23 Ranchi18 SC14 Rajasthan6 Orissa2 Punjab & Haryana2 Gauhati2 Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 6893 Addition to Income80 Section 14855 Cash Deposit40 Section 14436 Section 143(3)34 Section 14727 Section 142(1)26 Section 13224 Section 115B

RACHIT AGGARWAL (PROP.) ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA & CO.,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, WARD II(2), LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 858/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.Krishnan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 234BSection 271ASection 68

cash deposited in bank out of business receipts invoking section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act on surmises and conjectures

Showing 1–20 of 376 · Page 1 of 19

...

23

Demonetization16

Natural Justice12

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. SHREE BALAJI PROCESSORS, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas, the 29

ITA 499/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 499/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Ito, Vs. Shree Balaji Processors, बनाम Ward-1(3), Tajpur Road, Ludhiana Opp. Central Jail, Ludhiana 141010 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Actfs8428B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent & C.O. No. 09/Chd/2024 ( In आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 499/Chd/2023) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shree Balaji Processors, Vs. The Ito, बनाम Tajpur Road, Ward-1(3), Opp. Central Jail, Ludhiana Ludhiana 141010 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Actfs8428B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 69A

Cash deposit is a part of sale proceeds and provision of section 69A of the Act cannot be applied in respect of income from a source which has already been taxed and which would amount to double taxation. B. No addition u/s 69A of Income Tax Act, 1961 can be made as where the books of accounts have been rejected

SWARN GANGA JEWELLERS,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4(1) NOW DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 675/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: This Tribunal Being Aggrieved By An Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1045180258(1) For A.Y. 2017-18 Dt. 05/09/2022 Which Is Hereinafter Referred To As The “Impugned Order”. The Impugned Order Is Passed By Cit(A) In Terms Of Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Factual Matrix 2. That Survey U/S 133A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Was Conducted On The Business Premises Of The Assessee On 06/09/2016. The Assessee Surrendered A Sum Of Rs. 50,00,000/- During The Survey & Paid Tax Thereon. The Return Of Income Was Filed On 01/11/2017 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs. 89,48,260/-. Thereafter The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Compulsory Scrutiny Guidelines & Notice Under Section 143(2) Of The Act Was Issued On 11/09/2018. The Assessment Was Finalised Vide Order Dt. 23/12/2019 Whereby Addition Of Rs. 95,70,882/- Was Made U/S 68 R.W..S 115Bbe Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 250Section 253Section 68

deposited out of day to day cash sales. The appellant submitted that there was no justification to make addition u/s 68 of the Act on account of cash sales recorded in books of accounts. The Ld. AR also questioned retrospective applicability of section

SANDEEP KUMAR SANSERWAL,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO WARD-4, YAMUNAGAR

In the result, the addition so made is hereby directed to be deleted

ITA 527/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vibhor Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

cash credit u/s 68. 2. Because the action of dismissing the appeal is being challenged facts & law for invoking the provision of section 68 while the deposits

BHANU PRATAP JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, LUDHIANA

In the result the appeal is allowed

ITA 155/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 155/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Bhanu Pratap Jain, Proprietor, Vs. The Ito, बनाम Ward Vii(1), M/S Pehal International, Ludhiana B-31, Phase V, Focal Point, Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Agzpjj0090L अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 08.08.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

cash deposits to income of assessee under section 68 - It was noted that cash deposit in bank on account of cash

M/S SATWANT AGRO ENGINEERS,BHAWANIGARH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PATIALA

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

ITA 753/CHANDI/2022[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 May 2024

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69A

section 68 of Income Tax Act 196lis explained in case of Badri Prasad Gupta VS Asstt. CIT (2008)14 DTR (Agra-Trib) 348 held that, "It was observed that for a cash credit, two parties are required. The one is the assessee and the other is the cash creditor. Another person should have deposited

PAWAN KUMAR,AMBALA, HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3 AMBALA, AMBALA CANTT

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 626/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 44ASection 69A

deposited in the bank out of the cash withdrawal from the same bank or recovered from the zimidars. As assessee has not other source of income other then commission income and he has not purchased / sold any goods. Addition made by Ld. AO is wrong, unjustified and against the facts of the case. Reconciliation of sales, VAT, Commission

SH. RAJNEESH THAKUR,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-VII, LUDHIANA

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1565/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1565/Chd/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: ShriSudhirSehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriAtulJayaswal, Sr. Dr

Section 250(6)Section 69Section 69A

cash deposited inthe bank account of the assessee in IDBI of Rs. 16,49,000 stands explained and the addition made therefore by treating the same as unexplained under section 69 of the act is directed to be deleted. GroundNo. 1& 2 of the appeal are allowed. 12. Ground No. 3 reads as under: 3. That

RAM SINGH,DISTRICT KAITHAL, HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KAITHAL, INCOME TAX OFFICE, AMBALA ROAD, KAITHAL

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 920/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Disposed Of.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69

68,586/-. Further, during the course of assessment proceedings, it was found that total cash of Rs. 1,58,58,450/- only was deposited in the bank accounts. After that Notices u's 142(1) along with questionnaire were issued from time to time for submitting the source of cash deposits. During the course of assessment proceedings, assessee had submitted

BANUR BROTHER ,PATIALA vs. ITO-WARD-1, AMBALA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed as and by way of remand to Ld

ITA 772/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 253Section 270ASection 69A

deposited is liable to be added under deeming provision of section 69A." 2.2.21 It's essential to note that there is not any liability for cash withdrawals from the bank account. Every person, as defined under section 2(31) of the Act, may hold a bank account, and withdraw cash to meet various day-to-day expenses or to make

GAURAV GOEL,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, WARD 4(3), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 132/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 132/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Gaurav Goel, Vs. The Ito, बनाम H. No. 1676, Sector 33-D, Ward 4(3), Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ahgpg3162Q अपीलाथ"/ Assessee ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Jaspal Sharma, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश/Order Per Paresh M. Joshi, Jm :

For Appellant: Shri Jaspal Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253

deposited out of day to day cash sales. The appellant submitted that there was no justification to make addition u/s 68 of the Act on account of cash sales recorded in books of accounts. The Ld. AR also questioned retrospective applicability of section

GURU NANAK STEEL TRADERS,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, YAMUNA NAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 782/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR

Section 115Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69A

68 of the Act. In response to the show-cause, the assessee filed necessary submission and documentation and it was submitted that the cash has been deposited from the disclosed sources as per the cash book of the assessee. The submissions so filed were considered but not found acceptable to the AO. The AO referring to the provisions of Section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH vs. JAMES HOTELS LTD, CHANDIGARH

ITA 552/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: The Said Resolution To Enhance Authorized Share Capital.

For Appellant: Shri R.K. KapoorFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT, DR

Section 143(2)Section 269SSection 271D

deposited the cash towards share application money and provisions of section 269SS are not applicable in such case. It was also explained that total share application money received during the year amounts to Rs. 2948 Lacs out of which only Rs. 175 Lacs was received in cash. The assessee company is a Public Limited Company and accounts of the entity

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. MANJIT KAUR, CHANDIGARH

ITA 45/CHANDI/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

Section 139(1)Section 271(1)(c)

68, Chandigarh Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AEKPS5692A Appeal against the order of CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 28.10.2016 "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Pankaj Bhalla, CAs राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Chanderkanta, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15.02.2019 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 20.03.2019 आदेश/Order

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. KULWANT SINGH, MOHALI

ITA 44/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

Section 139(1)Section 271(1)(c)

68, Chandigarh Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AEKPS5692A Appeal against the order of CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 28.10.2016 "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Pankaj Bhalla, CAs राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Chanderkanta, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15.02.2019 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 20.03.2019 आदेश/Order

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. JASWANT KAUR, MOHALI

ITA 54/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

Section 139(1)Section 271(1)(c)

68, Chandigarh Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AEKPS5692A Appeal against the order of CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 28.10.2016 "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Pankaj Bhalla, CAs राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Chanderkanta, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15.02.2019 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 20.03.2019 आदेश/Order

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. KULWANT SINGH, MOHALI

ITA 387/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

Section 139(1)Section 271(1)(c)

68, Chandigarh Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AEKPS5692A Appeal against the order of CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 28.10.2016 "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Pankaj Bhalla, CAs राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Chanderkanta, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15.02.2019 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 20.03.2019 आदेश/Order

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

ITA 50/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

Section 139(1)Section 271(1)(c)

68, Chandigarh Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AEKPS5692A Appeal against the order of CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 28.10.2016 "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Pankaj Bhalla, CAs राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Chanderkanta, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15.02.2019 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 20.03.2019 आदेश/Order

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. JASWANT KAUR, MOHALI

ITA 51/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

Section 139(1)Section 271(1)(c)

68, Chandigarh Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AEKPS5692A Appeal against the order of CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 28.10.2016 "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Pankaj Bhalla, CAs राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Chanderkanta, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15.02.2019 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 20.03.2019 आदेश/Order

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

ITA 48/CHANDI/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

Section 139(1)Section 271(1)(c)

68, Chandigarh Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AEKPS5692A Appeal against the order of CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 28.10.2016 "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Pankaj Bhalla, CAs राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Chanderkanta, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15.02.2019 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 20.03.2019 आदेश/Order