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 293clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi539Karnataka438Mumbai366Bangalore256Jaipur146Hyderabad104Chennai91Ahmedabad82Kolkata82Raipur46Amritsar42Lucknow39Indore36Surat32Chandigarh31Patna29Pune27Calcutta16Cochin15Rajkot13Nagpur10Telangana10Allahabad8Agra7Jodhpur7Ranchi7Visakhapatnam4SC4Rajasthan3Panaji2Jabalpur2Cuttack2Orissa2Varanasi1Andhra Pradesh1Dehradun1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 201(1)40Section 271C30Section 20120Section 4014Section 194J10Penalty10TDS10Section 143(3)6Section 115B4Section 68

BHIMA JEWELLERS,SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD vs. THE PR CIT, KOZHIKKODE, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 208/COCH/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.208/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Bhima Jewellers, Vs. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income- 6/785 Ai, Tax, Kozhikode. Mysore Road, Chungum Junction, Sulthan Bathery, Wayanad-673 592. [Pan: Aakfb 9817C] (Assessee-Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) Revenue By Shri Dhanaraj A. Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri R. Krishnan, Ca Date Of Hearing 05/07/2018 Date Of Pronouncement 20/08/2018

Section 115BSection 14Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69BSection 69CSection 69D
4
Deduction3
Disallowance3

section 68 of the Act is not income from the assessee's business, it has been wrongly ordered to be treated as assessee's business income. We notice that the case law of CIT vs. Abdul Rahman Industries (2007) 293

M/S.APOLLO TYRES LTD,COCHIN vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 609/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Apollo Tyres Ltd. .......... Appellant 3Rd Floor, Areekal Mansion, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi 682036 [Pan: Aaaca6990Q] Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Kochi ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv. Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35Section 43(1)Section 92C

68,464 Total 15,60,52,275 11. It is submitted that in respect of reimbursement of salary and other expenses to Apollo Vrerdestein B.V., Netherlands the same were held to be allowable by the Tribunal for AY 2010-11 vide 21 Apollo Tyres Ltd. order dated 10.01.2017. The decision of the Tribunal was confirmed by the Hon'ble Kerala

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 613/COCH/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

293 ITR 226 (SC) [Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage P.Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax]. The relevant paragraph is quoted hereunder:- "Be that as it may, circular No. 275/ 201/95-IT(B) dated January 29, 1997, issued by the central Board of Direct Taxes, in our considered opinion, should put an end to the controversy. The circular dec1ares "no demand visualized under

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 614/COCH/2010[007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

293 ITR 226 (SC) [Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage P.Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax]. The relevant paragraph is quoted hereunder:- "Be that as it may, circular No. 275/ 201/95-IT(B) dated January 29, 1997, issued by the central Board of Direct Taxes, in our considered opinion, should put an end to the controversy. The circular dec1ares "no demand visualized under

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 606/COCH/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

293 ITR 226 (SC) [Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage P.Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax]. The relevant paragraph is quoted hereunder:- "Be that as it may, circular No. 275/ 201/95-IT(B) dated January 29, 1997, issued by the central Board of Direct Taxes, in our considered opinion, should put an end to the controversy. The circular dec1ares "no demand visualized under

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 607/COCH/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

293 ITR 226 (SC) [Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage P.Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax]. The relevant paragraph is quoted hereunder:- "Be that as it may, circular No. 275/ 201/95-IT(B) dated January 29, 1997, issued by the central Board of Direct Taxes, in our considered opinion, should put an end to the controversy. The circular dec1ares "no demand visualized under

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 609/COCH/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

293 ITR 226 (SC) [Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage P.Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax]. The relevant paragraph is quoted hereunder:- "Be that as it may, circular No. 275/ 201/95-IT(B) dated January 29, 1997, issued by the central Board of Direct Taxes, in our considered opinion, should put an end to the controversy. The circular dec1ares "no demand visualized under

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 611/COCH/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

293 ITR 226 (SC) [Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage P.Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax]. The relevant paragraph is quoted hereunder:- "Be that as it may, circular No. 275/ 201/95-IT(B) dated January 29, 1997, issued by the central Board of Direct Taxes, in our considered opinion, should put an end to the controversy. The circular dec1ares "no demand visualized under

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 612/COCH/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

293 ITR 226 (SC) [Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage P.Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax]. The relevant paragraph is quoted hereunder:- "Be that as it may, circular No. 275/ 201/95-IT(B) dated January 29, 1997, issued by the central Board of Direct Taxes, in our considered opinion, should put an end to the controversy. The circular dec1ares "no demand visualized under

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 610/COCH/2010[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

293 ITR 226 (SC) [Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage P.Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax]. The relevant paragraph is quoted hereunder:- "Be that as it may, circular No. 275/ 201/95-IT(B) dated January 29, 1997, issued by the central Board of Direct Taxes, in our considered opinion, should put an end to the controversy. The circular dec1ares "no demand visualized under

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 608/COCH/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

293 ITR 226 (SC) [Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage P.Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax]. The relevant paragraph is quoted hereunder:- "Be that as it may, circular No. 275/ 201/95-IT(B) dated January 29, 1997, issued by the central Board of Direct Taxes, in our considered opinion, should put an end to the controversy. The circular dec1ares "no demand visualized under

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 615/COCH/2010[09-Aug]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

293 ITR 226 (SC) [Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage P.Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax]. The relevant paragraph is quoted hereunder:- "Be that as it may, circular No. 275/ 201/95-IT(B) dated January 29, 1997, issued by the central Board of Direct Taxes, in our considered opinion, should put an end to the controversy. The circular dec1ares "no demand visualized under

THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.MFAR HOTELS & RESORTS LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 335/COCH/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail: A.Y. : 2011-12 C.O. No. 13/Coch/2015 : A.Y. : 2011-12 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 335/Coch/15)

For Appellant: Shri Rajakannan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 250

section 143(3) of the Act, inter-alia, disagreed with the submissions of the assessee and held that there has been extensive renovation and replacement of the existing hotel and, therefore, the claim of the assessee that no new advantage was gained is not correct. The AO further held that the total look and feel of the convention centre

ACIT, ERNAKULAM vs. M/S.TIME ADS & PUBLICITY, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, and the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 226/COCH/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sajit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 40

68,010, alleging it to be in excess by Rs.1,91,60,958. 3. We have heard parties, and perused the material on record. 3.1 The only issue before us in the Revenue’s appeal is the disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) to the extent it survives the first appellate order. We begin by examining the decision in Prudential Logistic

TIME ADS & PUBLICITY,KOCHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(2), KOCHI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, and the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 27/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sajit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 40

68,010, alleging it to be in excess by Rs.1,91,60,958. 3. We have heard parties, and perused the material on record. 3.1 The only issue before us in the Revenue’s appeal is the disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) to the extent it survives the first appellate order. We begin by examining the decision in Prudential Logistic