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.

2 results for “section 68”+ Section 482clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka322Delhi295Mumbai174Kolkata145Bangalore116Ahmedabad84Agra62Jaipur56Lucknow31Chandigarh31Chennai30Indore24Hyderabad19Cochin13Pune12Surat9Dehradun8Guwahati8Visakhapatnam7Jodhpur7Ranchi4Varanasi4Telangana4SC4Raipur4Allahabad3Rajkot3Cuttack2Rajasthan1Andhra Pradesh1Orissa1Nagpur1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1

Key Topics

Section 2637Section 143(3)5Section 682

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. MAGNUM TELESOFT PVT. LTD., BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 82/CTK/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.82/Ctk/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S Magnum Telesoft Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., 132-A, Sector- A, Zone-A, Mancheswar Industrial Estate, Bhubaneswar-10 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadca 1519 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Pradhan,Citdr "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty & M.Ganesh, Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 10/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 16/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Passed In Itappeal No.0542/2014-15, Dated 3.12.2015, U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, Wherein The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds :- 1 On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Law As Well As On Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.48,07,984/- Made By The Ao U/S.68 On Account Of Unsecured Loan. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law In Not Accepting The Examination Of Findings Made By The Ao On The Issue. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Medical Transcription & Filed The Return Of Income Electronically For The Assessment Year 2010-2011 On 10.03.2011 With Total

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty & M.Ganesh, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan,CITDR
Section 115JSection 133(6)
Section 143(1)
Section 143(2)
Section 143(3)
Section 68

482/- and the return of income was processed u/s.143(1) of the Act on 29.8.2011. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and the notice u/s.143(2) & 142(1) of the Act were issued. In compliance, the ld. AR appeared from time to time and produced the books of accounts, cash book, ledger copies and bills and vouchers are test

SUREKHA BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. PRINCIPAL CIT-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 207/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT,DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

482/- - Surekha Regency, Rs.12,04,63,062/- - Surekha Vatika and Rs.2,05,03,866/- . The Emerald. He further noticed that the revenues amounting to Rs.3,51,44,682/- and Rs.86,80,000/- were booked against Surekha Regency and the Emerald respectively in the financial year 2011- 12. Thus, revenue of Rs.12,04,63,062/- from Surekha Vatika was recognized only