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.

5,091 results for “section 68”+ Section 28clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi5,091Mumbai4,456Bangalore1,569Kolkata1,098Chennai1,094Ahmedabad1,015Jaipur899Hyderabad748Karnataka697Pune562Indore456Chandigarh455Surat447Cochin272Raipur253Rajkot205Visakhapatnam205Nagpur141Agra140Lucknow138Amritsar119Cuttack119Telangana118Guwahati97SC83Ranchi78Calcutta77Allahabad68Jodhpur58Patna53Panaji39Jabalpur28Dehradun25Varanasi21Kerala10Rajasthan10Orissa9Uttarakhand3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI2Gauhati2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1Tripura1Andhra Pradesh1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1HARJIT SINGH BEDI CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD1

Key Topics

Addition to Income71Section 143(3)59Section 153A50Section 6837Disallowance32Section 153C30Section 14A29Deduction24Section 14823Section 263

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ORIENT CRAFTS LTD.

ITA/955/2009HC Delhi01 Jun 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 260ASection 28Section 5Section 80H

68,991/- in the assessment year 2003- 04. 10% of the said amount was taken into consideration under Explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC. However, the export quota premium was not taken into consideration while applying proviso to sub Section 3 to Section 80HHC on the ground that it does not fall within Section 28

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ORIENT CRAFT LTD.

ITA - 994 / 2008HC Delhi01 Jun 2012
Section 260A

Showing 1–20 of 5,091 · Page 1 of 255

...
16
Section 92C16
Comparables/TP10
Section 28
Section 5
Section 80H

68,991/- in the assessment year 2003- 04. 10% of the said amount was taken into consideration under Explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC. However, the export quota premium was not taken into consideration while applying proviso to sub Section 3 to Section 80HHC on the ground that it does not fall within Section 28

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ORIENT CARFT LTD.

ITA - 996 / 2008HC Delhi01 Jun 2012
Section 260ASection 28Section 5Section 80H

68,991/- in the assessment year 2003- 04. 10% of the said amount was taken into consideration under Explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC. However, the export quota premium was not taken into consideration while applying proviso to sub Section 3 to Section 80HHC on the ground that it does not fall within Section 28

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V vs. NAGESH KNITWEARS P.LTD.

ITA - 591 / 2008HC Delhi01 Jun 2012
Section 260ASection 28Section 5Section 80H

68,991/- in the assessment year 2003- 04. 10% of the said amount was taken into consideration under Explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC. However, the export quota premium was not taken into consideration while applying proviso to sub Section 3 to Section 80HHC on the ground that it does not fall within Section 28

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ORIENT CRAFT LTD.

ITA - 993 / 2008HC Delhi01 Jun 2012
Section 260ASection 28Section 5Section 80H

68,991/- in the assessment year 2003- 04. 10% of the said amount was taken into consideration under Explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC. However, the export quota premium was not taken into consideration while applying proviso to sub Section 3 to Section 80HHC on the ground that it does not fall within Section 28

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ORIENT CRAFT LTD.

ITA - 1010 / 2008HC Delhi01 Jun 2012
Section 260ASection 28Section 5Section 80H

68,991/- in the assessment year 2003- 04. 10% of the said amount was taken into consideration under Explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC. However, the export quota premium was not taken into consideration while applying proviso to sub Section 3 to Section 80HHC on the ground that it does not fall within Section 28

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V vs. NAGESH KNITWEARS P. LTD.

ITA/591/2008HC Delhi01 Jun 2012
Section 260ASection 28Section 5Section 80H

68,991/- in the assessment year 2003- 04. 10% of the said amount was taken into consideration under Explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC. However, the export quota premium was not taken into consideration while applying proviso to sub Section 3 to Section 80HHC on the ground that it does not fall within Section 28

ITO WARD - 13(3), NEW DELHI vs. JINGLE BELLS ALUMINIUM PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 5527/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28. LandskyReal 2013-14 Section 68 Regarding share capital of Rs. 16 Estate Pvt Share crores: the AO on the issues

JINGLE BELLS ALUMINIUM,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 13(3), NEW DELHI

ITA 5397/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28. LandskyReal 2013-14 Section 68 Regarding share capital of Rs. 16 Estate Pvt Share crores: the AO on the issues

LANDSKY REAL ESTATES P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-15(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 509/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28. LandskyReal 2013-14 Section 68 Regarding share capital of Rs. 16 Estate Pvt Share crores: the AO on the issues

KASPER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-14(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 9357/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28. LandskyReal 2013-14 Section 68 Regarding share capital of Rs. 16 Estate Pvt Share crores: the AO on the issues

KASPER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-14(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 510/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28. LandskyReal 2013-14 Section 68 Regarding share capital of Rs. 16 Estate Pvt Share crores: the AO on the issues

ITO WARD - 14(2), NEW DELHI vs. KASPER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

ITA 9287/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28. LandskyReal 2013-14 Section 68 Regarding share capital of Rs. 16 Estate Pvt Share crores: the AO on the issues

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUPREME PLACEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 5650/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28. LandskyReal 2013-14 Section 68 Regarding share capital of Rs. 16 Estate Pvt Share crores: the AO on the issues

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ANGEL CEMENT PVT. LTD.,, GHAZIABAD

ITA 4691/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28. LandskyReal 2013-14 Section 68 Regarding share capital of Rs. 16 Estate Pvt Share crores: the AO on the issues

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUKHNA STEEL PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 5741/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28. LandskyReal 2013-14 Section 68 Regarding share capital of Rs. 16 Estate Pvt Share crores: the AO on the issues

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SINTEX CONSUMERS ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD., DELHI

ITA 5736/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28. LandskyReal 2013-14 Section 68 Regarding share capital of Rs. 16 Estate Pvt Share crores: the AO on the issues

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUNLIGHT TOUR AND TRAVELS PVT. LTD., SAHIBABAD

ITA 5740/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28. LandskyReal 2013-14 Section 68 Regarding share capital of Rs. 16 Estate Pvt Share crores: the AO on the issues

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUKHNA REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD., GHAZIABAD

ITA 5742/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28. LandskyReal 2013-14 Section 68 Regarding share capital of Rs. 16 Estate Pvt Share crores: the AO on the issues

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S STYLISH CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

ITA 5744/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28. LandskyReal 2013-14 Section 68 Regarding share capital of Rs. 16 Estate Pvt Share crores: the AO on the issues