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.

15 results for “section 68”+ Section 928clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai156Delhi146Bangalore52Ahmedabad47Kolkata31Pune27Hyderabad25Jaipur23Chennai16Chandigarh15Cuttack12Visakhapatnam7Surat7Guwahati5Karnataka3Cochin3Indore3Nagpur2Ranchi2SC2Lucknow2Orissa1Panaji1Amritsar1Rajkot1

Key Topics

Section 26316Section 14A15Section 250(6)13Section 80I10Section 2538Section 246A8Section 143(3)8Section 143(2)8Deduction5Disallowance

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 796/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

5
Reassessment2
Addition to Income2

DCIT CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LTD, LUDHIANA

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 748/CHANDI/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 177/CHANDI/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, - vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LTD, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 818/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, , AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 817/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 795/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4,, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 794/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, FOCAL POINT

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 84/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

WARYAM STEEL CASTINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 715/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Muskan Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 148Section 250

68 taxmann.com 410 (Delhi - Trib.) (xiv) Where purchases made by assessee-trader were duly supported by bills and payments were made by account payee cheque, seller also confirmed transaction and there was no evidence to show that amount was recycled back to assessee, Assessing Officer was not justified in treating said purchases as bogus under section 69C: SLP dismissed

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. WARYAM STEEL CASTING PRIVATE LIMITED, KANGANWAL ROAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 757/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Muskan Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 148Section 250

68 taxmann.com 410 (Delhi - Trib.) (xiv) Where purchases made by assessee-trader were duly supported by bills and payments were made by account payee cheque, seller also confirmed transaction and there was no evidence to show that amount was recycled back to assessee, Assessing Officer was not justified in treating said purchases as bogus under section 69C: SLP dismissed

DCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA vs. M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LIMITED, LUDHIANA

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 611/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.484 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chanderkanta, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 80I

928/-, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee contended that major amount of interest included in the above, amounting to Rs.26,84,428/- ,had been received from Electricity Board on security deposit and being purely of business nature, the same was eligible for deduction u/s 80IB/80IC of the Act. 22. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied upon the order

DCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA vs. M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LIMITED, LUDHIANA

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 612/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.484 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chanderkanta, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 80I

928/-, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee contended that major amount of interest included in the above, amounting to Rs.26,84,428/- ,had been received from Electricity Board on security deposit and being purely of business nature, the same was eligible for deduction u/s 80IB/80IC of the Act. 22. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied upon the order

M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-1, LUDHIANA

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 484/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.484 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chanderkanta, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 80I

928/-, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee contended that major amount of interest included in the above, amounting to Rs.26,84,428/- ,had been received from Electricity Board on security deposit and being purely of business nature, the same was eligible for deduction u/s 80IB/80IC of the Act. 22. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied upon the order

M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. JCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 485/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.484 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chanderkanta, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 80I

928/-, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee contended that major amount of interest included in the above, amounting to Rs.26,84,428/- ,had been received from Electricity Board on security deposit and being purely of business nature, the same was eligible for deduction u/s 80IB/80IC of the Act. 22. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied upon the order

DCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA vs. VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD., LUDHIANA

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 613/CHANDI/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.484 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chanderkanta, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 80I

928/-, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee contended that major amount of interest included in the above, amounting to Rs.26,84,428/- ,had been received from Electricity Board on security deposit and being purely of business nature, the same was eligible for deduction u/s 80IB/80IC of the Act. 22. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied upon the order