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 271Eclear

Sorted by relevance

Jaipur40 Mumbai26 Delhi26 Chennai21 Karnataka21 Ahmedabad16 Hyderabad16 Indore12 Pune11 Visakhapatnam10 Kolkata9 Agra8 Surat7 Bangalore6 Chandigarh5 Rajkot4 Ranchi3 Jabalpur2 Cuttack2 Nagpur2 SC1 Cochin1 Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 271D25 Section 271E15 Penalty5

SH. MOHINDER PAL SINGH,LUDHIANA vs. ADDL. CIT, R-VII, LUDHIANA

In the result all the appeals of the Assessee’s are allowed

ITA 193/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri. Nikhil GoyalFor Respondent: Shri Manu Malik

Section 271DSection 271E

68,000/- under section 271E of the Act which is arbitrary and unjustified. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has failed

SH. RAMNEEK SEHGAL,LUDHIANA vs. JCIT, RANGE VII, LUDHIANA

In the result all the appeals of the Assessee’s are allowed

ITA 195/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: Disposed

ITAT Chandigarh

08 Jun 2018

AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri. Nikhil GoyalFor Respondent: Shri Manu Malik

Section 271DSection 271E

68,000/- under section 271E of the Act which is arbitrary and unjustified. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has failed

SH. MOHINDER PAL SINGH,LUDHIANA vs. ADDL. CIT, R-VII, LUDHIANA

In the result all the appeals of the Assessee’s are allowed

ITA 192/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri. Nikhil GoyalFor Respondent: Shri Manu Malik

Section 271DSection 271E

68,000/- under section 271E of the Act which is arbitrary and unjustified. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has failed

SH. RAMNEEK SEHGAL,LUDHIANA vs. JCIT, RANGE VII, LUDHIANA

In the result all the appeals of the Assessee’s are allowed

ITA 194/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri. Nikhil GoyalFor Respondent: Shri Manu Malik

Section 271DSection 271E

68,000/- under section 271E of the Act which is arbitrary and unjustified. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has failed

SMT. PARAMJEET KAUR,LUDHIANA vs. JCIT, RANGE VII, LUDHIANA

In the result all the appeals of the Assessee’s are allowed

ITA 196/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri. Nikhil GoyalFor Respondent: Shri Manu Malik

Section 271DSection 271E

68,000/- under section 271E of the Act which is arbitrary and unjustified. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has failed