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.

8 results for “section 68”+ Section 245Fclear

Sorted by relevance

Pune11 Delhi8 Rajkot4 Kolkata2 Jaipur1

Key Topics

Section 153C12 Section 15410 Section 271A8 Addition to Income8 Section 2456 Section 270A5 Section 143(3)3 Section 683 Section 245D(1)2

PRAVESH KUMAR GARG,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-47(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 1641/DEL/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar, Senior DR

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(3)Section 245CSection 245D(1)Section 245D(4)Section 245FSection 270A

68, the petition of the assessee already stood admitted and was allowed to be proceeded with ITSC vide order dated 18.12.2019 and accordingly, the AO was precluded from passing any order or levying/initiating penalty order under any provision relating to quantum of addition. This issue was specifically raised before the ld. CIT (A) which has been noted by her that

DCIT CIRCLE-1 LTU, NEW DELHI vs. DALMIA BHARAT SUGAR & INDUSTRIES LTD, NEW DELHI

Accordingly we dispose of the matters for AY 2007-08 to 2011-12 for the same reasons as under :- i. Thus, For AY 2007-08, Ground no 1 & 2 of the appeal of the ld AO are dismissed

ITA 5402/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivatava, CIT DR

Section 153CSection 245

245F read with Section 245D (6) and Section 245I of the income tax act and deserves to be annulled at the very threshold. 36. He further submitted that even the requisite condition of provisions of Section 153C are also not satisfied as the pen drive could not be said to be belonging to the assessee. He reiterated

DCIT CIRCLE-I(LTU), NEW DELHI vs. DALMIA BHARAT SUGAR AND INDUSTRIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Accordingly we dispose of the matters for AY 2007-08 to 2011-12 for the same reasons as under :- i. Thus, For AY 2007-08, Ground no 1 & 2 of the appeal of the ld AO are dismissed

ITA 5404/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivatava, CIT DR

Section 153CSection 245

245F read with Section 245D (6) and Section 245I of the income tax act and deserves to be annulled at the very threshold. 36. He further submitted that even the requisite condition of provisions of Section 153C are also not satisfied as the pen drive could not be said to be belonging to the assessee. He reiterated

DCIT CIRCLE-I(LTU), NEW DELHI vs. DALMIA BHARAT SUGAR AND INDUSTRIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Accordingly we dispose of the matters for AY 2007-08 to 2011-12 for the same reasons as under :- i. Thus, For AY 2007-08, Ground no 1 & 2 of the appeal of the ld AO are dismissed

ITA 5405/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivatava, CIT DR

Section 153CSection 245

245F read with Section 245D (6) and Section 245I of the income tax act and deserves to be annulled at the very threshold. 36. He further submitted that even the requisite condition of provisions of Section 153C are also not satisfied as the pen drive could not be said to be belonging to the assessee. He reiterated

DCIT CIRCLE-I(LTU), NEW DELHI vs. DALMIA BHARAT SUGAR AND INDUSTRIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Accordingly we dispose of the matters for AY 2007-08 to 2011-12 for the same reasons as under :- i. Thus, For AY 2007-08, Ground no 1 & 2 of the appeal of the ld AO are dismissed

ITA 5403/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivatava, CIT DR

Section 153CSection 245

245F read with Section 245D (6) and Section 245I of the income tax act and deserves to be annulled at the very threshold. 36. He further submitted that even the requisite condition of provisions of Section 153C are also not satisfied as the pen drive could not be said to be belonging to the assessee. He reiterated

DCIT CIRCLE-I(LTU), NEW DELHI vs. DALMIA BHARAT SUGAR AND INDUSTRIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Accordingly we dispose of the matters for AY 2007-08 to 2011-12 for the same reasons as under :- i. Thus, For AY 2007-08, Ground no 1 & 2 of the appeal of the ld AO are dismissed

ITA 5406/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivatava, CIT DR

Section 153CSection 245

245F read with Section 245D (6) and Section 245I of the income tax act and deserves to be annulled at the very threshold. 36. He further submitted that even the requisite condition of provisions of Section 153C are also not satisfied as the pen drive could not be said to be belonging to the assessee. He reiterated

DCIT CIRCLE-I(LTU), NEW DELHI vs. DALMIA BHARAT SUGAR AND INDUSTRIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Accordingly we dispose of the matters for AY 2007-08 to 2011-12 for the same reasons as under :- i. Thus, For AY 2007-08, Ground no 1 & 2 of the appeal of the ld AO are dismissed

ITA 5401/DEL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivatava, CIT DR

Section 153CSection 245

245F read with Section 245D (6) and Section 245I of the income tax act and deserves to be annulled at the very threshold. 36. He further submitted that even the requisite condition of provisions of Section 153C are also not satisfied as the pen drive could not be said to be belonging to the assessee. He reiterated

ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 3768/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 143(3)Section 148

68(del) - Turner Broadcasting Systems Asia Pacific Inc. vs DCIT (2016) 380 ITR 412 (del) - Rasalika Trading and Investemnt Co. Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT ( 2014) 365 ITR 447(Del) (ii) that the Assessing Officer has not applied his mind while adopting rate of US dollar for computing interest liability and therefore, reasons need to be rejected on the ground