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 202clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi578Karnataka494Mumbai408Bangalore129Chennai121Ahmedabad119Jaipur89Kolkata76Hyderabad46Rajkot45Chandigarh36Surat33Pune30Raipur28Indore27Nagpur23Lucknow17Cuttack17Calcutta16Telangana15Guwahati12Amritsar10Visakhapatnam7Jodhpur7Ranchi7SC5Rajasthan4Patna3Agra3Dehradun2Allahabad2Cochin2Jabalpur1Gauhati1Andhra Pradesh1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)2Section 144C(13)2Transfer Pricing2Disallowance2Comparables/TP2

BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DDIT/ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ) CIRCLE-1, DEHRADUN

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

ITA 7/DDN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 Dec 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri V.P. Raoassessment Years: 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. N.S. Jangpangi, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 44C

202 ITR 789) where the Court held that closing value of an asset of previous year ought to be taken as opening value of the asset for the immediately succeeding year. Relevant extracts of the decision are as under: “Thus, the value of the closing stock of the preceding year must be the value of the opening stock

BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DDIT/ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE -1, DEHRADUN

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

ITA 5/DDN/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun31 Mar 2022AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri T.S. Mapwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

68,11,169 by treating it as pre-operative in nature. 6 6.2 The learned AO / DRP erred in not appreciating that the said expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the Appellant’s business in India. 6.3 The learned AO / DRP erred in not appreciating that this expenditure was held as allowable