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.

91 results for “section 68”+ Section 144Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi91 Mumbai70 Chennai62 Kolkata24 Allahabad21 Pune19 Bangalore17 Indore16 Jaipur16 Lucknow14 Patna11 Chandigarh10 Nagpur10 Surat9 Hyderabad9 Raipur9 Visakhapatnam8 Ahmedabad7 Agra5 Cuttack4 Amritsar3 Cochin2 Karnataka2 Rajkot1 Orissa1 SC1

Key Topics

Section 153D143 Section 153A81 Addition to Income64 Section 6850 Section 13248 Section 143(3)37 Search & Seizure37 Section 26330 Section 153C29 Section 80I

SURABHI ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED ( PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS PEARLS ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-24(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, this appeal stands dismissed on merit

ITA 9736/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 68

144A, we have no hesitation to 8 hold that the addition under Section 68 cannot be made in the case

SH. HIMANSHU VERMA,DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 91 · Page 1 of 5

24

ITA 1627/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

144A, we have no hesitation to ITA- 3477/D/2013 & 8 others 19 hold that the addition under Section 68 cannot

SH. HIMANSHU VERMA,DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1628/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

144A, we have no hesitation to ITA- 3477/D/2013 & 8 others 19 hold that the addition under Section 68 cannot

SH. HIMANSHU VERMA,DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1629/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

144A, we have no hesitation to ITA- 3477/D/2013 & 8 others 19 hold that the addition under Section 68 cannot

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. HIMANSHU VERMA, DELHI

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1753/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

144A, we have no hesitation to ITA- 3477/D/2013 & 8 others 19 hold that the addition under Section 68 cannot

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. HIMANSHU VERMA, DELHI

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1754/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

144A, we have no hesitation to ITA- 3477/D/2013 & 8 others 19 hold that the addition under Section 68 cannot

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. HIMANSHU VERMA, DELHI

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1752/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

144A, we have no hesitation to ITA- 3477/D/2013 & 8 others 19 hold that the addition under Section 68 cannot

M/S. CENTRAL GUM & CHEMICALS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1668/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Central Gum & Chemicals Vs. Dcit, Central –Iii, New Ltd., 308, Arunachal Building Delhi 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Gir/Pan :Aaccc4405A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. V. Raja Kumar, Adv. Respondent By Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 26.07.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 29.07.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Dated 06/11/2013 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xxxiii, New Delhi For Assessment Year 2008-09 Raising Following Grounds: “That The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Confirming The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143 (3) Of The Act On 27.12.2010 Which Is Bad Both On Facts & In Law; 2) That The Authorities Below Erred Both On Facts & In Law In Making An Addition Of Rs.24,17,66,963/- U/S 68 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Without Appreciating The Fact

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 68

144A, we have no hesitation to ITA-3477/D/2013 & 8 others 19 hold that the addition under Section 68

HURON BUILDERS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 6(1), NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal is allowed on this preliminary

ITA 6251/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Garg, Adv. & Shri AkarshFor Respondent: Ms. Sugandha Sharma, Sr.D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 68

68 of the Act, either on facts or in law; (5) the Authorities below have erred in law and on facts in making/sustaining addition for sums aggregating Rs.6,26,00,000/- (as had been received from fifteen share applicants), antecedents of all the applicants being ‘self-proved’ as is evident from the regular assessment proceedings/ assessment order for subsequent assessment

DHAMAKA TRADING & CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (HQ), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 3575/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Ms. Suchitra Kamble :Asstt. Yr: 2008-09 Dhamaka Trading & Vs. Dcit (Hq), Construction Pvt Ltd., Central Circle-Iii, (Now Known As Deus Trading & New Delhi. Construction Pvt. Ltd.), 308, Arunachal Building, 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aabcd 9454 H ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri V. Raja Kumar Adv. Respondent By : Shri Amrit Lal Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 09/12/2015. Date Of Order : 02/02/2016. O R D E R Per S.V. Mehrotra, A.M:

For Appellant: Shri V. Raja Kumar AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrit Lal Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 144ASection 245Section 292Section 68

144A, we have no hesitation to hold that the addition under Section 68 cannot be made in the case

M/S. VIAGRA TRADING CO. PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3422/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh.N.K.Saini & Sh.K.N.Charyviagra Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 308, Arunachal Bldg., 19, Central Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001. Circle-Iii, Pan-Aabcv9360N New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R.S.Singhvi & Sh. Satyajit Goyal, Ca Respondent By Sh. Sampurnanand, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 28.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement .11.2017 Order Per K.N.Charyaggrieved By The Order Dated 29.01.2014 In Appeal No.380/10-11/352 Passing By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) [In Short “Cit(A)”]-Xxxiii, New Delhi For 2008-09 Assessment Year, The Assessee Filed This Appeal.

144A, we have no hesitation to hold that the addition under Section 68 cannot be made in the case

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. SURESH KUMAR GUPTA, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed accordingly

ITA 4950/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 68

144A of the act, The coordinate bench has held that the addition under section 68 cannot be made in the case

MRS. RUPAL JAIN,MEERUT vs. ACIT, MEERUT

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

ITA 975/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shyam Manohar Singh, Sr.DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 68

68 of the Act. It was pointed out that only ground for addition is non adherence of personal attendance called under Section 131 of the Act which was watered down and modified by the Additional Commissioner in terms of directions issued under Section 144A

M/S. CHANDER PRABHU FINANCIAL SERVICE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3421/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 3421/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 M/S Chander Prabhu Financial Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Service Pvt. Ltd., 308, Arunachal (Hq), Central Circle-Iii, Bldg., 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc1205G Assessee By : Sh. Sandeep Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.10.2016 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 29.01.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Sandeep Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR

144A, we have no hesitation to hold that the addition under Section 68 cannot be made in the case

SURENDRA KUMAR JAIN,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 6998/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Nirupama Kotru, CIT, DR

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

144A, we have no hesitation to hold that the addition under Section 68 cannot be made in the case

VIRENDRA JAIN,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 6991/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Nirupama Kotru, CIT, DR

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

144A, we have no hesitation to hold that the addition under Section 68 cannot be made in the case

SMT. PADMA DEVI MALIK,GURGAON vs. ITO, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2482/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 2482/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Padma Devi Malik, Vs Income Tax Officer, C-4C, 123, Carlton Estate, Ward-Ii(1), Phase-V, Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aakpm7458G Assessee By : Sh. Salil Kapoor & Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Cas Revenue By : Sh. Bedobani Chaudhari, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.03.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2017 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 17.02.2016 Of Ld. Cit(A)-2, Gurgaon.

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor & Ms. Ananya Kapoor, CAsFor Respondent: Sh. Bedobani Chaudhari, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 271(1)(c)

section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 applies when the assessee's explanation regarding cash credit is rejected as being unsatisfactory or when the assessee does not render any explanation. v) In the present case, the assessee made cash deposits aggregating Rs. 30,65,000/-with ICICI Bank has failed to render explanation with documentary evidence. Keeping in view

M/S. ANILA INDUSTRIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3415/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Sapra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 142Section 144ASection 245(4)Section 251Section 292CSection 68

68 is not applicable. The assessing officer has studiously kept quite on this issue although the same was raised in our application under Section 46A dated 6.3.2012. The assessing officer was enjoined in law to comment as to how and why the same decision taken by the Addl. Commissioner of Income tax under Section 144A

MANJU SHARMA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 45(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8275/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Manju Sharma, Vs Ito, Wz-43B, Meenakshi Garden, Ward-45(5), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aatps2170A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Krishnan Sampath, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Rinku Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.11.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.09.2019 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-15, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Is Proprietor Of M/S Eastern Galaxy Which Is Engaged In The Business Of Export Of Handicrafts & Decorative Items. She Filed Her Return Of Income On 29.11.2014 Declaring Taxable Income Of Rs.47,10,000/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny Under Cass With The Reason That There Is “Large Increase In Sundry Creditors With Respect To Turnover As Compared To Preceding Year.”

For Appellant: Shri Krishnan Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Rinku Singh, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 144ASection 68

144A of Act. 7. Vide letter dated 21.12.2016 the JCIT, Range - 45 directed the AO to make local enquiries through Inspector in 6 cases where the sales made during the year were exceeding Rs. 10 lakhs and to issue summons u/s 131 for personal attendance and also for calling PAN/ITR with complete annexures, complete books of accounts with purchase

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, DELHI, DELHI vs. YASMIN KAPOOR, DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2221/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanacit, Vs. Deepa Talwar, Central Circle-19, 6/14, Shanti Niketan, Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaupt4464F

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kumar Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

144A of the Act. She stated that even the Additional CIT/JCIT is involved in the preparation of final assessment order by way of instructing the Assessing Officer issuing final show cause notice. She referred to Paragraph 3.2 of the Manual, which reads as under:- “3.2 All the issues and evidence that is going to be relied upon in the assessment