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.

1,850 results for “section 68”+ Section 271(1)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,850 Mumbai1,713 Ahmedabad495 Karnataka470 Jaipur376 Kolkata274 Chennai262 Bangalore261 Pune228 Hyderabad172 Indore170 Surat165 Chandigarh139 Raipur137 Rajkot100 Guwahati59 Calcutta57 Cochin50 Lucknow48 Visakhapatnam47 Nagpur45 Amritsar41 Allahabad33 Cuttack24 Agra24 SC20 Patna16 Dehradun15 Jabalpur13 Telangana13 Jodhpur10 Ranchi9 Varanasi7 Rajasthan4 Panaji3 Gauhati1 HARJIT SINGH BEDI CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD1 K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1 Andhra Pradesh1 Punjab & Haryana1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Addition to Income82 Section 6874 Section 271(1)(c)58 Section 143(3)42 Penalty40 Section 27139 Section 153A31 Section 14730 Section 27423 Section 148

JAR METAL INDUSTRIES(P) LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-13(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

ITA 9694/DEL/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2025AY 2005-06

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

sections": [ "271(1)(c)", "274", "143(3)", "68", "139(1)", "142(1)" ], "issues": "Whether the penalty proceedings initiated under

AMIT BANSAL,HARYANA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-16, DELHI

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

ITA 3664/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Showing 1–20 of 1,850 · Page 1 of 93

...

23

Natural Justice17

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

271(1)(c) of 1.T.Act: 1. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Smt. Meera Devi [2012] 26 taxmann.com 132 (Delhi)/[2013] 212 Taxman 68 (Delhi) (MAG.)/[2012] 253 CTR 559 (Delhi), interpreted the applicability of Expln. 5 to Section

SURESH CHAND BANSAL,HARYANA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-16 , DELHI

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

ITA 3666/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

271(1)(c) of 1.T.Act: 1. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Smt. Meera Devi [2012] 26 taxmann.com 132 (Delhi)/[2013] 212 Taxman 68 (Delhi) (MAG.)/[2012] 253 CTR 559 (Delhi), interpreted the applicability of Expln. 5 to Section

AMIT BANSAL,HARYANA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-16, DELHI

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

ITA 3665/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

271(1)(c) of 1.T.Act: 1. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Smt. Meera Devi [2012] 26 taxmann.com 132 (Delhi)/[2013] 212 Taxman 68 (Delhi) (MAG.)/[2012] 253 CTR 559 (Delhi), interpreted the applicability of Expln. 5 to Section

SAVITA BANSAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-35(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8937/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mathur, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rajareswari R, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 54FSection 68

68 of the Act. The Assessing Officer also disallowed deduction claimed of Rs.51,02,718/- under Section 54F of the Act. The Assessing Officer while making the aforesaid additions also initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c

HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3702/DEL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 10Section 10ASection 271(1)

Section 271(1)(c) remains a penal statute. Rule of strict construction shall apply thereto. Ingredients of imposing penalty remains the same. The purpose of the legislature that it is meant to be deterrent to tax evasion is evidenced by the increase in the quantum of penalty, from 20% under the 1922 Act to 300% in 1985. 67. 'Concealment

HARISH KUMAR HUF,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-34(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1469/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Dr. B.R.R. Kumara.Y. : 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Naveen ND Gupta, CA & Sh. AshuFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 288ASection 94(7)

271(1)(c) are bad in law being contrary to facts, principles of natural justice, provisions of law and judgments of courts in India.” 4. The brief facts relating to the issue in dispute are that the assessee filed its return of income declaring net taxable income at Rs. 35,29,470/- on 17.9.2015 for the assessment year

SANJEEV J AIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6883/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

Section 271(1)(c) and argued that when there is difference of returned income between the return of income filed for any previous year in regular course of assessment proceedings, and the return filed in response to notice issued u/s. 153A post search ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 7 then, the difference of income between the two returns

RISHABH BUILDWELL P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6881/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

Section 271(1)(c) and argued that when there is difference of returned income between the return of income filed for any previous year in regular course of assessment proceedings, and the return filed in response to notice issued u/s. 153A post search ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 7 then, the difference of income between the two returns

SANJEEV JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6885/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

Section 271(1)(c) and argued that when there is difference of returned income between the return of income filed for any previous year in regular course of assessment proceedings, and the return filed in response to notice issued u/s. 153A post search ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 7 then, the difference of income between the two returns

SANJEEV J AIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6882/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

Section 271(1)(c) and argued that when there is difference of returned income between the return of income filed for any previous year in regular course of assessment proceedings, and the return filed in response to notice issued u/s. 153A post search ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 7 then, the difference of income between the two returns

SANJEEV JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6886/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

Section 271(1)(c) and argued that when there is difference of returned income between the return of income filed for any previous year in regular course of assessment proceedings, and the return filed in response to notice issued u/s. 153A post search ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 7 then, the difference of income between the two returns

RISHABH BUILDWELL P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6880/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

Section 271(1)(c) and argued that when there is difference of returned income between the return of income filed for any previous year in regular course of assessment proceedings, and the return filed in response to notice issued u/s. 153A post search ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 7 then, the difference of income between the two returns

SANJEEV JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6884/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

Section 271(1)(c) and argued that when there is difference of returned income between the return of income filed for any previous year in regular course of assessment proceedings, and the return filed in response to notice issued u/s. 153A post search ITA Nos. 6880 to 6886 & 7139/Del/2018 7 then, the difference of income between the two returns

GENERAL ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEMS INC.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(3)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the eight appeals are allowed for statistical purposes and all the

ITA 693/DEL/2019[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Smt. Beena A. Pillai & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 260A of the Act which has also been admitted and substantial question of law framed. This itself shows that the issue is debatable. For these reasons, we are of the opinion that no question of law arises in the present case. This appeal is accordingly dismissed.” 2.1) Ld. Counsel for assessee further drew our attention to the order

GE JENBACHER GMBH & CO.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(3)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , NEW DELHI

In the result, all the eight appeals are allowed for statistical purposes and all the

ITA 756/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Beena A. Pillai & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 260A of the Act which has also been admitted and substantial question of law framed. This itself shows that the issue is debatable. For these reasons, we are of the opinion that no question of law arises in the present case. This appeal is accordingly dismissed.” 2.1) Ld. Counsel for assessee further drew our attention to the order

GE PACKAGED POWER INC.,GURGAON vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1(3)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the eight appeals are allowed for statistical purposes and all the

ITA 765/DEL/2019[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Smt. Beena A. Pillai & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 260A of the Act which has also been admitted and substantial question of law framed. This itself shows that the issue is debatable. For these reasons, we are of the opinion that no question of law arises in the present case. This appeal is accordingly dismissed.” 2.1) Ld. Counsel for assessee further drew our attention to the order

ADIT, NEW DELHI vs. GE JENBACHER GMBH & CO., GURGAON

In the result, all the eight appeals are allowed for statistical purposes and all the

ITA 754/DEL/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. Beena A. Pillai & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 260A of the Act which has also been admitted and substantial question of law framed. This itself shows that the issue is debatable. For these reasons, we are of the opinion that no question of law arises in the present case. This appeal is accordingly dismissed.” 2.1) Ld. Counsel for assessee further drew our attention to the order

GE JENBACHER GMBH & CO. OHG,GURGAON vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the eight appeals are allowed for statistical purposes and all the

ITA 755/DEL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. Beena A. Pillai & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 260A of the Act which has also been admitted and substantial question of law framed. This itself shows that the issue is debatable. For these reasons, we are of the opinion that no question of law arises in the present case. This appeal is accordingly dismissed.” 2.1) Ld. Counsel for assessee further drew our attention to the order

GE JENBACHER GMBH & CO. OHG,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(3)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , NEW DELHI

In the result, all the eight appeals are allowed for statistical purposes and all the

ITA 757/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Beena A. Pillai & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 260A of the Act which has also been admitted and substantial question of law framed. This itself shows that the issue is debatable. For these reasons, we are of the opinion that no question of law arises in the present case. This appeal is accordingly dismissed.” 2.1) Ld. Counsel for assessee further drew our attention to the order