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.

465 results for “section 68”+ Section 153Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi465Mumbai305Jaipur114Chennai106Hyderabad74Cochin71Bangalore52Chandigarh41Guwahati38Visakhapatnam27Patna24Pune23Allahabad21Ahmedabad15Agra12Dehradun10Nagpur9Indore9Karnataka7Lucknow7Surat6Raipur5Rajkot5Amritsar4Jodhpur4Cuttack3Kolkata3SC2Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 153D158Section 153A145Section 153C81Addition to Income59Section 26349Section 143(3)45Search & Seizure31Section 13229Section 6822Section 250

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 vs. SMT. SNEH LATA SAWHNEY

ITA/707/2023HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/72/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

Showing 1–20 of 465 · Page 1 of 24

...
21
Limitation/Time-bar19
Reassessment14

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/788/2023HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SH. PRAVEEN SAWHNEY

ITA/783/2023HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 vs. SMT. SNEH LATA SAWHNEY

ITA/694/2023HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SH. PRAVEEN SAWHNEY

ITA/93/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/75/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 vs. SMT. SNEH LATA SAWHNEY (L/H LATE SH. B.L. SAWHNEY )

ITA/216/2023HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. PRAVEEN SAWHNEY

ITA/89/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/74/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/787/2023HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/76/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SH. PRAVEEN SAWHNEY

ITA/799/2023HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SH. PRAVEEN SAWHNEY

ITA/88/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/69/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/796/2023HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/781/2023HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/790/2023HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SH. PRAVEEN SAWHNEY

ITA/92/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SH. PRAVEEN SAWHNEY

ITA/94/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

153B of the Act. The Supreme Court directed that the period during which a stay order was granted, that is, from 24.08.2000 till 15.12.2006 when the judgment setting aside the direction issued under Section 142(2A) of the Act was delivered, was to be excluded for computing the period available for passing the assessment order. However, it is material