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.

115 results for “section 68”+ Section 364clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka440Mumbai431Delhi353Chennai115Jaipur78Bangalore62Ahmedabad54Hyderabad40Chandigarh37Kolkata37Calcutta35Raipur20Lucknow19Indore18Surat15Cuttack10Visakhapatnam8Patna8Pune8Agra6Telangana6Cochin5Rajkot5Guwahati5Amritsar4SC4Kerala2Nagpur2Varanasi1Allahabad1Andhra Pradesh1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)50Addition to Income46Section 14826Disallowance22Reopening of Assessment18Reassessment17Section 6815Section 153A14Depreciation13

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE2(4), CHENNAI vs. S. ELAMBHARATHI, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cos\nfiled by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 221/CHNY/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2024AY 2016-17
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

364,\nKurupam Court, Lloyds Road,\nGopalapuram, Chennai 600 086.\n[PAN: AACPE3945N]\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/Cross Objector)\nShri V. Nandakumar, CIT\nShri G. Baskar, Advocate &\nShri P.M. Kathir, Advocate\nDepartment by\nAssessee by\n:\n:\nआदेश/ORDER\n:\n:\nसुनवाई की तारीख / Date of hearing\nघोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement\n28.08.2024\n25.09.2024\nPER BENCH:\nBoth the appeals and the Cross

SUBRAMANIAN RAJAN ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 6, CHENNAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 115 · Page 1 of 6

Section 1112
Penalty12
Survey u/s 133A10
ITA 2418/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed
ITAT Chennai
05 Mar 2018
AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamonyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2418/Chny/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs The Acit, Shri Subramanian Rajan, Non Corporate Circle 6, New No.26/1, Old No.22/1, Chennai. Deivasigamani Street, Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014. Pan: Acfpr4402A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri K.G. Raghunath, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Appellant By ""यथ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit

For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 68

section 68" 6.4.2 In [2014] 44 taxmann.com 364 (Delhi) Commissioner of Income-Tax vs Youth Construction (P.) Ltd, the hon'ble High

SMT. DEVAKUMARI,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NCC-11, , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3066/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.Corrigendum To I.T.A. No.3066/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Smt. Devakumari, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 48, Venkata Maistry Street, Income Tax, Mannady, Chennai 600 001. Non Corporate Circle 11, [Pan:Aagpd0150L] Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) शु""प" आदेश /Corrignendum Order Per V. Durga Rao: The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No. 3066/Chny/2019 As Well As The Appeal Filed By The Revenue In Ita No. 3181/Chny/2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Were Disposed Off By The Division Bench ‘B’, Chennai Benches, Chennai Vide Common Order Dated 13.09.2023. The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Brought To The Notice That There Is A Typographical Error In Last Sentence In Para 9 Of The Order, Wherein, The Bench Has Observed That The Element Of Personal Usage Cannot Be Ruled Out In The Absence Of Production Of Electricity Bills & Thereby, The Addition To The Extent Of ₹.2,00,000/- Has Been Sustained Out Of Addition Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A). However, It Was Also Mentioned That The “Balance Addition Of ₹.3,00,000/- Stands Sustained” Is A Typographical Error.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

364. 6.4 Once the assessee has discharged the onus cast upon her with regard to identity of the creditors, their creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions, we are of the considered opinion that there would not be any case for the Department to treat the credits as unexplained under section 68

ACIT, NCC-11,, CHENNAI vs. SMT. DEVAKUMARI,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3181/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3066/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Smt. Devakumari, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 48, Venkata Maistry Street, Income Tax, Mannady, Chennai 600 001. Non Corporate Circle 11, Chennai. [Pan:Aagpd0150L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3181/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Smt. Devakumari, Income Tax, No. 48, Venkata Maistry Street, Non Corporate Circle 11(1), Mannady, Chennai 600 001. Chennai.

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

364. 6.4 Once the assessee has discharged the onus cast upon her with regard to identity of the creditors, their creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions, we are of the considered opinion that there would not be any case for the Department to treat the credits as unexplained under section 68

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), CHENNAI vs. SHRI S. ELEMBHARATHI, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cos filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 220/CHNY/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.220 & 221/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 & C.O. Nos. 7 & 8/Chny/2022 [In Ita Nos. 220 & 221/Chny/2022] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shri S. Elambharathi, Income Tax, Central Circle -2 (4), Flat No. 5, Ground Floor, 364, Room No. B6, Investigation Building, Kurupam Court, Lloyds Road, No. 46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai 600 086. Chennai 34. [Pan: Aacpe3945N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit Assessee By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri P.M. Kathir, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: Both The Appeals & The Cross Objections Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Respectively Are Directed Against The Common Order Dated 28.01.2022 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2017-18. 2. Since The Issue Raised In The Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 3Section 68

364, Room No. B6, Investigation Building, Kurupam Court, Lloyds Road, No. 46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai 600 086. Chennai 34. [PAN: AACPE3945N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department by : Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT Assessee by : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri P.M. Kathir, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 28.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.09.2024 आदेश

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (2), CHENNAI vs. M/S MIDAS GOLDEN DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHIPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2562/CHNY/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2562/Chny/2017 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasi Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)

364 ITR 53 (Del) (HC), Riddhi Promoters P Ltd Vs :- 3 -: CIT [2015] 58 Taxmann.com 367(Del) and by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Major Metals Ltd Vs Union of India & Others (2012) 251 CTR 385 on facts similar to the case of the assessee company, wherein the AO had conducted enquiries and established

VARAM CAPITAL PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP. CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1222/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI HON'BLE S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri T.V.Muthuabhirami, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263Section 68

68 of the Act. During appellate proceedings, the assessee has remained non-responsive despite multiple opportunities Varam Capital Pvt. Ltd. :- 4 -: provided u/s 250 of the Act as mentioned in the previous paragraphs. In the light of the fact that the nature and source of cash deposits have not been explained with documentary evidences, the addition made u/s.68

KRISHNAMURTHY PANDY,THANJAVUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, THANJAVUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2560/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. R. Santhanu, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.T
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

364/- was raised. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A) on various grounds. The ld.CIT(A) vide order dated 22.07.2025 upheld the addition u/s.69A of the Act to the tune of Rs.22,03,500/- stating that the assessee has not substantiated the cash deposits with relevant documentary evidence and also

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2281/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41 and also section 43 of the Act, dismissed the claim of assessee by discussing in para 6.6.1 as under

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2275/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41 and also section 43 of the Act, dismissed the claim of assessee by discussing in para 6.6.1 as under

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2278/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41 and also section 43 of the Act, dismissed the claim of assessee by discussing in para 6.6.1 as under

M/S. V.V.VANNIAPERUMAL & SONS,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. PCIT-2, CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1765/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41 and also section 43 of the Act, dismissed the claim of assessee by discussing in para 6.6.1 as under

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2276/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41 and also section 43 of the Act, dismissed the claim of assessee by discussing in para 6.6.1 as under

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2279/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41 and also section 43 of the Act, dismissed the claim of assessee by discussing in para 6.6.1 as under

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2280/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41 and also section 43 of the Act, dismissed the claim of assessee by discussing in para 6.6.1 as under

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2277/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41 and also section 43 of the Act, dismissed the claim of assessee by discussing in para 6.6.1 as under

PAUL DHINAKARAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-391), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the for A

ITA 1067/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.1067/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 Paul Dhinakaran, The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 7, Jeevarathinam Nagar, Adyar, Income Tax, Chennai 600 020. V. Central Circle 3(1), Chennai. [Pan: Aabpd8489M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

364/-.” The Hon’ble ITAT in the cases Ankur Sharma vs. DCIT, ITA No.1843/Del/2022 Assessment Year 2019-20 order dated 06.10.2023; Gagan Saran Sharma vs. DCIT, ITA No.1844/Del/2022 order dated 06.10.2023 and Ankit Sharma &ors. vs. DCIT, ITA No.1842/Del/2022 order dated 16.10.2023 has taken a similar view. In these group of cases, total jewellery found during the search under Section

THE CHEMICAL ENGINEERING CORPORATION P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2375/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2375/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Vs The Acit, M/S. The Chemical Engineering Corporation P Ltd., Corporate Circle – 3(1), (Now Cec Flavours & Chennai – 34. Fragrances Pvt. Ltd., No.10/25, Perumal Koil Garden, 1St Lane, Sowcarpet, Chennai – 600 079. Pan: Aaact2310H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Smt. Vijayaprabha, JCITFor Respondent: 09.05.2018
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 40Section 40a

68,960/- b) Payment to Exhibit World towards stall installation & dismantling - Rs.3,22,340/- (ii) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.60,000/- by invoking the provisions of Section 14A r.w.R. 8D of the Rules. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business

M.R.PRASAD,TRICHY vs. ITO, TRICHY

In the result, the appeals of the assessees for all the

ITA 1219/CHNY/2017[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Aug 2017AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. A.S. Sriraman, Adv
Section 133ASection 148Section 271(1)Section 281B

364 Salary and interest from the firm M/s. Natchiyar Industrial Makes. 1996-97 S. Devendran 2,76,000 Opening balance as on 01.04.1995 1997-98 S. Devendran 1,68,750 Investments in M/s. Natchiyar Industrial Makes. 25,233 Salary and interest from M/s. Natchiyar Industrial Makes. 1996-97 M.R. Prakash 1,81,330 Opening balance

S.DEVENDRAN,TRICHY vs. ITO, TRICHY

In the result, the appeals of the assessees for all the

ITA 1220/CHNY/2017[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Aug 2017AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. A.S. Sriraman, Adv
Section 133ASection 148Section 271(1)Section 281B

364 Salary and interest from the firm M/s. Natchiyar Industrial Makes. 1996-97 S. Devendran 2,76,000 Opening balance as on 01.04.1995 1997-98 S. Devendran 1,68,750 Investments in M/s. Natchiyar Industrial Makes. 25,233 Salary and interest from M/s. Natchiyar Industrial Makes. 1996-97 M.R. Prakash 1,81,330 Opening balance