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.

6 results for “section 68”+ Section 249(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai565Delhi523Karnataka487Ahmedabad151Kolkata138Bangalore135Jaipur126Chennai65Chandigarh58Indore56Hyderabad56Pune54Nagpur47Surat41Raipur39Guwahati17Calcutta17Cochin16Visakhapatnam14Lucknow14Rajkot11Telangana9Varanasi8Agra7Amritsar7SC7Dehradun6Ranchi6Panaji5Cuttack4Rajasthan4Patna3Allahabad3Jodhpur2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 6925Section 6820Section 143(3)10Section 14210Addition to Income6Unexplained Cash Credit5Unexplained Investment5Section 1442

SH.SURENDER KUMAR CHAWLA,RUDRAPUR vs. ACIT , CC, HALDWANI, HALDWANI

In the result, assessee’s appeals; ITA No

ITA 63/DDN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun20 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: BEFORESHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

Section 142Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

2. The case of the appellant does not fall under any of the categories for compulsory scrutiny as per criteria of selection of cases for compulsory scrutiny. 3. There was no search warrant in the name of appellant. There was no incriminating material seized during the search operation from hands of the appellant and there was no panchnama drawn

SH. SURINDER KUMAR CHAWLA,RUDRAPUR vs. ACIT,CC, HALDWANI, HALDWANI

In the result, assessee’s appeals; ITA No

ITA 62/DDN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun20 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: BEFORESHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

Section 142Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

2. The case of the appellant does not fall under any of the categories for compulsory scrutiny as per criteria of selection of cases for compulsory scrutiny. 3. There was no search warrant in the name of appellant. There was no incriminating material seized during the search operation from hands of the appellant and there was no panchnama drawn

SH.SURENDER KUMAR CHAWLA,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, CC, DEHRADUN, HALDWANI

In the result, assessee’s appeals; ITA No

ITA 210/DDN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun20 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: BEFORESHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

Section 142Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

2. The case of the appellant does not fall under any of the categories for compulsory scrutiny as per criteria of selection of cases for compulsory scrutiny. 3. There was no search warrant in the name of appellant. There was no incriminating material seized during the search operation from hands of the appellant and there was no panchnama drawn

SH. SURENDER KUMAR CHAWLA,RUDRAPUR vs. ACIT, CC, , HALDWANI

In the result, assessee’s appeals; ITA No

ITA 76/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun20 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: BEFORESHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

Section 142Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

2. The case of the appellant does not fall under any of the categories for compulsory scrutiny as per criteria of selection of cases for compulsory scrutiny. 3. There was no search warrant in the name of appellant. There was no incriminating material seized during the search operation from hands of the appellant and there was no panchnama drawn

SH. SURENDER KUMAR CHAWLA,RUDRAPUR vs. ACIT, CC-, HALDWANI, HALDWANI

In the result, assessee’s appeals; ITA No

ITA 75/DDN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun20 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: BEFORESHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

Section 142Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

2. The case of the appellant does not fall under any of the categories for compulsory scrutiny as per criteria of selection of cases for compulsory scrutiny. 3. There was no search warrant in the name of appellant. There was no incriminating material seized during the search operation from hands of the appellant and there was no panchnama drawn

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN vs. SWARNGANGA CONSTRUCTION P.LTD, BHILWARA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 186/DDN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri V.P. Rao

For Appellant: Sh. N.S. Jangpangi, CIT/DRFor Respondent: Sh. Kapil Goel, Advocate
Section 144Section 153CSection 249(3)Section 250(4)Section 271(1)(c)

section 144 and penalty order u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act respectively for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. In the quantum appeal, the assessee raised following grounds : “1. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in condoning the delay of more than 2 years merely on ground that