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.

105 results for “section 68”+ Section 127(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,181Mumbai712Karnataka491Jaipur286Bangalore250Ahmedabad174Kolkata168Hyderabad147Chandigarh135Indore108Cochin105Chennai102Pune75Nagpur60Raipur56Visakhapatnam55Calcutta53Surat46Telangana43Lucknow40Rajkot33Cuttack30Guwahati26Patna25Agra14Jodhpur12SC12Amritsar12Dehradun8Ranchi8Allahabad5Rajasthan5Varanasi5Orissa4Jabalpur4Panaji2Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 250108Section 153A58Addition to Income30Section 143(3)21Section 142(1)16Exemption13Section 1278Section 1445Section 245C(1)5Natural Justice

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 582/COCH/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

127(2) on 18.07.2018. The extended date of limitation for completion of assessments was 29.06.2020 whereas the assessment was framed on 17.03.2020 and therefore, the assessments were completed within time limits prescribed u/s 153B(3). For AY 2018-19, the assessee filed return of income on 31.01.2020 but the return was not electronically filed and verified ITR-V was also

Showing 1–20 of 105 · Page 1 of 6

5
Limitation/Time-bar5
Section 684

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 583/COCH/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

127(2) on 18.07.2018. The extended date of limitation for completion of assessments was 29.06.2020 whereas the assessment was framed on 17.03.2020 and therefore, the assessments were completed within time limits prescribed u/s 153B(3). For AY 2018-19, the assessee filed return of income on 31.01.2020 but the return was not electronically filed and verified ITR-V was also

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 580/COCH/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

127(2) on 18.07.2018. The extended date of limitation for completion of assessments was 29.06.2020 whereas the assessment was framed on 17.03.2020 and therefore, the assessments were completed within time limits prescribed u/s 153B(3). For AY 2018-19, the assessee filed return of income on 31.01.2020 but the return was not electronically filed and verified ITR-V was also

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 586/COCH/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

127(2) on 18.07.2018. The extended date of limitation for completion of assessments was 29.06.2020 whereas the assessment was framed on 17.03.2020 and therefore, the assessments were completed within time limits prescribed u/s 153B(3). For AY 2018-19, the assessee filed return of income on 31.01.2020 but the return was not electronically filed and verified ITR-V was also

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 585/COCH/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

127(2) on 18.07.2018. The extended date of limitation for completion of assessments was 29.06.2020 whereas the assessment was framed on 17.03.2020 and therefore, the assessments were completed within time limits prescribed u/s 153B(3). For AY 2018-19, the assessee filed return of income on 31.01.2020 but the return was not electronically filed and verified ITR-V was also

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 584/COCH/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

127(2) on 18.07.2018. The extended date of limitation for completion of assessments was 29.06.2020 whereas the assessment was framed on 17.03.2020 and therefore, the assessments were completed within time limits prescribed u/s 153B(3). For AY 2018-19, the assessee filed return of income on 31.01.2020 but the return was not electronically filed and verified ITR-V was also

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 581/COCH/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

127(2) on 18.07.2018. The extended date of limitation for completion of assessments was 29.06.2020 whereas the assessment was framed on 17.03.2020 and therefore, the assessments were completed within time limits prescribed u/s 153B(3). For AY 2018-19, the assessee filed return of income on 31.01.2020 but the return was not electronically filed and verified ITR-V was also

SMT.K.B.SONY,COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, COCHIN

In the result, i) The appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 320/COCH/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 69

Section 36 deals with other deduction in respect of premium paid, interest etc. 3.7 In the present case, there is no allegation by the Assessing Officer that the sassessee has not incurred any expenditure. The only allegation is that the assessee has not rendered any services to M/s. Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd. In our opinion when there

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

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

ITA 42/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

68,77,750 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that the onus to establish the fact that the transaction is genuine, in view of diversion of profits to sister concerns which are enjoying tax exemptions and the seller incurring huge loss in the process, is on the assessee. According to the CIT(A), where a trader charges less than

SMT. T.C. USHA,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

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

ITA 45/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

68,77,750 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that the onus to establish the fact that the transaction is genuine, in view of diversion of profits to sister concerns which are enjoying tax exemptions and the seller incurring huge loss in the process, is on the assessee. According to the CIT(A), where a trader charges less than

SRI.R. PRATAP,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

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

ITA 37/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

68,77,750 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that the onus to establish the fact that the transaction is genuine, in view of diversion of profits to sister concerns which are enjoying tax exemptions and the seller incurring huge loss in the process, is on the assessee. According to the CIT(A), where a trader charges less than

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

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

ITA 43/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

68,77,750 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that the onus to establish the fact that the transaction is genuine, in view of diversion of profits to sister concerns which are enjoying tax exemptions and the seller incurring huge loss in the process, is on the assessee. According to the CIT(A), where a trader charges less than

SRI.K.RAVINDRANATHAN NAIR,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

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

ITA 46/COCH/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

68,77,750 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that the onus to establish the fact that the transaction is genuine, in view of diversion of profits to sister concerns which are enjoying tax exemptions and the seller incurring huge loss in the process, is on the assessee. According to the CIT(A), where a trader charges less than

SRI.R. PRATAP,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

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

ITA 38/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

68,77,750 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that the onus to establish the fact that the transaction is genuine, in view of diversion of profits to sister concerns which are enjoying tax exemptions and the seller incurring huge loss in the process, is on the assessee. According to the CIT(A), where a trader charges less than

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

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

ITA 47/COCH/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

68,77,750 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that the onus to establish the fact that the transaction is genuine, in view of diversion of profits to sister concerns which are enjoying tax exemptions and the seller incurring huge loss in the process, is on the assessee. According to the CIT(A), where a trader charges less than

SMT. T.C. USHA,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

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

ITA 44/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

68,77,750 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that the onus to establish the fact that the transaction is genuine, in view of diversion of profits to sister concerns which are enjoying tax exemptions and the seller incurring huge loss in the process, is on the assessee. According to the CIT(A), where a trader charges less than

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

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

ITA 48/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

68,77,750 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that the onus to establish the fact that the transaction is genuine, in view of diversion of profits to sister concerns which are enjoying tax exemptions and the seller incurring huge loss in the process, is on the assessee. According to the CIT(A), where a trader charges less than

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

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

ITA 40/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

68,77,750 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that the onus to establish the fact that the transaction is genuine, in view of diversion of profits to sister concerns which are enjoying tax exemptions and the seller incurring huge loss in the process, is on the assessee. According to the CIT(A), where a trader charges less than

SRI.R. PRATAP,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

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

ITA 39/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

68,77,750 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that the onus to establish the fact that the transaction is genuine, in view of diversion of profits to sister concerns which are enjoying tax exemptions and the seller incurring huge loss in the process, is on the assessee. According to the CIT(A), where a trader charges less than

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

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

ITA 49/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

68,77,750 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that the onus to establish the fact that the transaction is genuine, in view of diversion of profits to sister concerns which are enjoying tax exemptions and the seller incurring huge loss in the process, is on the assessee. According to the CIT(A), where a trader charges less than