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.

228 results for “section 68”+ Section 47clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi3,574 Mumbai3,033 Bangalore1,106 Chennai751 Ahmedabad737 Karnataka667 Jaipur583 Kolkata553 Hyderabad545 Indore394 Chandigarh297 Pune277 Cochin228 Surat213 Raipur189 Visakhapatnam152 Rajkot117 Agra107 Telangana105 Lucknow88 Nagpur88 Cuttack86 Calcutta66 Allahabad62 Guwahati58 SC53 Amritsar50 Ranchi46 Patna21 Dehradun21 Jodhpur21 Jabalpur16 Varanasi13 Rajasthan11 Orissa9 Panaji6 Kerala5 Uttarakhand3 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Andhra Pradesh1 K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1 HARJIT SINGH BEDI CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD1 ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1

Key Topics

Section 25066 Limitation/Time-bar35 Section 153C28 Section 153A27 Addition to Income27 Section 26312 Section 143(3)11 Section 115B9 Section 80P8 Exemption

INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

ITA 592/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Smt.Bineesha Baby,AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.. Leena Lal, Sr, DR

Section 143(3)Section 40ASection 68Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

47,19,707/- under Section 68 of the Act treating increase in FDR balances over the previous year as unexplained

THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, KOCHI, KOCHI vs. M/S.THOMSON AGENCIES, TRICHUR

Showing 1–20 of 228 · Page 1 of 12

...

7

Undisclosed Income5

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 315/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sri. Sathish John Kanichai, FCA

Section 132Section 153ASection 68

section leaves no doubt that the addition u/s 68 has to be made in the hands of the assessee in whose books the credits appear and not in the hands of the creditor of the assessee. 2. The CIT(A) in deciding that unexplained credits brought into the books of the firm by the partners need to considered

THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. M/S.THOMSON AGENCIES, THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 312/COCH/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sri. Sathish John Kanichai, FCA

Section 132Section 153ASection 68

section leaves no doubt that the addition u/s 68 has to be made in the hands of the assessee in whose books the credits appear and not in the hands of the creditor of the assessee. 2. The CIT(A) in deciding that unexplained credits brought into the books of the firm by the partners need to considered

THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. M/S.THOMSON AGENCIES, THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 310/COCH/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

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

For Appellant: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sri. Sathish John Kanichai, FCA

Section 132Section 153ASection 68

section leaves no doubt that the addition u/s 68 has to be made in the hands of the assessee in whose books the credits appear and not in the hands of the creditor of the assessee. 2. The CIT(A) in deciding that unexplained credits brought into the books of the firm by the partners need to considered

THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. M/S.THOMSON AGENCIES, TRICHUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 314/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sri. Sathish John Kanichai, FCA

Section 132Section 153ASection 68

section leaves no doubt that the addition u/s 68 has to be made in the hands of the assessee in whose books the credits appear and not in the hands of the creditor of the assessee. 2. The CIT(A) in deciding that unexplained credits brought into the books of the firm by the partners need to considered

THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. M/S.THOMSON AGENCIES, TRICHUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 313/COCH/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sri. Sathish John Kanichai, FCA

Section 132Section 153ASection 68

section leaves no doubt that the addition u/s 68 has to be made in the hands of the assessee in whose books the credits appear and not in the hands of the creditor of the assessee. 2. The CIT(A) in deciding that unexplained credits brought into the books of the firm by the partners need to considered

THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. M/S.THOMSON AGENCIES, KOMBODINJAMAKKAL, TRICHUR, TRICHUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 311/COCH/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sri. Sathish John Kanichai, FCA

Section 132Section 153ASection 68

section leaves no doubt that the addition u/s 68 has to be made in the hands of the assessee in whose books the credits appear and not in the hands of the creditor of the assessee. 2. The CIT(A) in deciding that unexplained credits brought into the books of the firm by the partners need to considered

THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. M/S.THOMSON AGENCIES, TRICHUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 316/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sri. Sathish John Kanichai, FCA

Section 132Section 153ASection 68

section leaves no doubt that the addition u/s 68 has to be made in the hands of the assessee in whose books the credits appear and not in the hands of the creditor of the assessee. 2. The CIT(A) in deciding that unexplained credits brought into the books of the firm by the partners need to considered

SRI.ESSA ISMAIL SAIT,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT,CIR-2(1),, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 605/COCH/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value

THE ACIT, CIR-1(1), ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.JOSE MATHEW, M/S.E.V.MTHAI & SONS, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 450/COCH/2007[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value

THEACIT, CIR-1(1),EKM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.E.M.JOHNY, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 453/COCH/2007[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.E.M.PAUL, EDAKATTUKUDIYIL, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 449/COCH/2007[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value

THE ITO, WD-2, THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA vs. SRI.E.J.SONY, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 355/COCH/2006[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.MATHAI XAVIER, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 451/COCH/2007[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value

THE ITO, WARD-2, THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA vs. SRI.MARTIN JOHNY, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 354/COCH/2006[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value

THE ITO, WD-2, THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA vs. SRI.TOMY MATHEW PARTNER OF MATHAI SONS, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 419/COCH/2007[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value

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 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

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.FRIDGEHOUSE RETAIL P. LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 81/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.ARFor Respondent: Sri.K.Sankaranarayanan, CA

Section 143(3)Section 68

section 68 of the Income Tax Act as the explanation offered by assessee company is not satisfactory.” The ld. CIT(A), in first appeal, examined the matter at length. All that the AO was, in his view, required to do was to see whether there had been a revaluation of assets and liabilities taken-over, or otherwise any adjustment

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

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

ITA 49/COCH/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

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

68,316/- was not considered by him. Insofar as the amount that has been taken by the Assessing Officer is concerned, the Tribunal has noted that in the absence of any details with regard to earning of income and the persons from whom the money was received, the Assessing Officer has rightly treated the entire amount as income. Insofar

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

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

ITA 51/COCH/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

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

68,316/- was not considered by him. Insofar as the amount that has been taken by the Assessing Officer is concerned, the Tribunal has noted that in the absence of any details with regard to earning of income and the persons from whom the money was received, the Assessing Officer has rightly treated the entire amount as income. Insofar