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.

4,344 results for “section 68”+ Section 43(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi4,344 Mumbai3,069 Bangalore1,175 Chennai802 Ahmedabad785 Kolkata711 Karnataka665 Jaipur635 Hyderabad591 Indore353 Chandigarh334 Pune315 Surat292 Cochin250 Raipur198 Rajkot143 Visakhapatnam138 Agra110 Cuttack105 Lucknow103 Nagpur101 Telangana97 Guwahati82 Amritsar66 Calcutta65 Jabalpur64 Ranchi62 Allahabad60 SC58 Patna45 Jodhpur38 Dehradun26 Varanasi19 Rajasthan11 Orissa9 Kerala7 Panaji4 Uttarakhand3 Andhra Pradesh2 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Addition to Income83 Section 14746 Section 153A45 Section 143(3)37 Section 153D36 Section 6835 Section 13229 Section 69A26 Section 14825 Search & Seizure

M/S CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 134/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

For Appellant: Shri Pardeep Dinodia & R.K. Kapoor, CAsFor Respondent: Smt. Parwinder Kaur, Senior DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 35(1)Section 43(1)

section 43(1)-Copy of valuation reports are available at PB 54 to 68. 6 The case laws relied

M/S. CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Showing 1–20 of 4,344 · Page 1 of 218

...

22

ITA 316/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

For Appellant: Shri Pardeep Dinodia & R.K. Kapoor, CAsFor Respondent: Smt. Parwinder Kaur, Senior DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 35(1)Section 43(1)

section 43(1)-Copy of valuation reports are available at PB 54 to 68. 6 The case laws relied

M/S CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1319/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

For Appellant: Shri Pardeep Dinodia & R.K. Kapoor, CAsFor Respondent: Smt. Parwinder Kaur, Senior DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 35(1)Section 43(1)

section 43(1)-Copy of valuation reports are available at PB 54 to 68. 6 The case laws relied

M/S CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 5656/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

For Appellant: Shri Pardeep Dinodia & R.K. Kapoor, CAsFor Respondent: Smt. Parwinder Kaur, Senior DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 35(1)Section 43(1)

section 43(1)-Copy of valuation reports are available at PB 54 to 68. 6 The case laws relied

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1291/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 68

1) of the Act proceeded to treat the aforesaid sum of Rs.134.99 crores as unexplained credit under section 68 of the Act. While making the said addition, the NFAC vaguely alleged that the assessee has not filed the requisite details/ documentary evidence to establish the nature and source of credit in the form of share capital

PGS EXPLORATION (NORWAY) vs. ADDITIOANAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

ITA/612/2012HC Delhi08 Apr 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra with Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr Standing Counsel

Section 115ASection 197Section 260ASection 44BSection 9(1)(vii)

68,74,62,560/-. 2.4 Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 29.07.2011, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal, inter alia, on the ground that the nature of income of the assessee would not fall within the definition of ‘fees for technical services’ by virtue of Explanation (2) to Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and that

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed to the extent as mentioned above on the preliminary issue and the departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 3304/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.J.S.Reddyi.T.A .No.-3304/Del/2010 (Assessment Year-2004-05) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Vs Dcit, Corporate Office, Taxation Section, Circle-2(1), Room No.-398, First Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Janpath, New Delhi-1110001. New Delhi Pan-Aabcb5576G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 80Section 80I

68,000 3. Interest from others 11,79,09,000 4. Liquidated Damages 76,71,90,000 5. Excess provision written back 1686,63,72,000 6. Others including sale of directories, 142,90,32,000 publications, forms, waste paper, etc. 6.2. Not convinced with the explanation offered the additions were made in the computation of income made under

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed to the extent as mentioned above on the preliminary issue and the departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 3386/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.J.S.Reddyi.T.A .No.-3304/Del/2010 (Assessment Year-2004-05) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Vs Dcit, Corporate Office, Taxation Section, Circle-2(1), Room No.-398, First Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Janpath, New Delhi-1110001. New Delhi Pan-Aabcb5576G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 80Section 80I

68,000 3. Interest from others 11,79,09,000 4. Liquidated Damages 76,71,90,000 5. Excess provision written back 1686,63,72,000 6. Others including sale of directories, 142,90,32,000 publications, forms, waste paper, etc. 6.2. Not convinced with the explanation offered the additions were made in the computation of income made under

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 vs. MANUPATRA INFORMATION SOLUTION

The appeal is disposed of declaring the law as above and setting aside

ITA/81/2016HC Delhi20 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

43 of 58 expression ‗whether at a University or school or elsewhere or by correspondence‘ as provided in Section 21(4) is absent in Section 52(1)(i). The legislative provision considered in the said judgment was : ‘In the course of instruction, whether at a University or a school or elsewhere or by correspondence, where the reproduction

M/S GLOBUS REAL INFRA PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2920/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1,738/- - Share Capital – section 68 7. Kasper Information Technology 28.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 Pvt. Ltd. 16 14 16,00,00,000 2,47,050/- - Share Capital – section 68 8. Landsky Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 31.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 - Share Capital – section 68 15 14 16,00,00,000 2,48,450/- - Advances – section

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

1,738/- - Share Capital – section 68 7. Kasper Information Technology 28.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 Pvt. Ltd. 16 14 16,00,00,000 2,47,050/- - Share Capital – section 68 8. Landsky Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 31.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 - Share Capital – section 68 15 14 16,00,00,000 2,48,450/- - Advances – section

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

1,738/- - Share Capital – section 68 7. Kasper Information Technology 28.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 Pvt. Ltd. 16 14 16,00,00,000 2,47,050/- - Share Capital – section 68 8. Landsky Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 31.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 - Share Capital – section 68 15 14 16,00,00,000 2,48,450/- - Advances – section

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

1,738/- - Share Capital – section 68 7. Kasper Information Technology 28.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 Pvt. Ltd. 16 14 16,00,00,000 2,47,050/- - Share Capital – section 68 8. Landsky Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 31.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 - Share Capital – section 68 15 14 16,00,00,000 2,48,450/- - Advances – section

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

1,738/- - Share Capital – section 68 7. Kasper Information Technology 28.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 Pvt. Ltd. 16 14 16,00,00,000 2,47,050/- - Share Capital – section 68 8. Landsky Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 31.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 - Share Capital – section 68 15 14 16,00,00,000 2,48,450/- - Advances – section

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUR BUILDCON PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 5831/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1,738/- - Share Capital – section 68 7. Kasper Information Technology 28.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 Pvt. Ltd. 16 14 16,00,00,000 2,47,050/- - Share Capital – section 68 8. Landsky Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 31.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 - Share Capital – section 68 15 14 16,00,00,000 2,48,450/- - Advances – section

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

1,738/- - Share Capital – section 68 7. Kasper Information Technology 28.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 Pvt. Ltd. 16 14 16,00,00,000 2,47,050/- - Share Capital – section 68 8. Landsky Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 31.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 - Share Capital – section 68 15 14 16,00,00,000 2,48,450/- - Advances – section

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUPERSTAR AGENCY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 5832/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1,738/- - Share Capital – section 68 7. Kasper Information Technology 28.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 Pvt. Ltd. 16 14 16,00,00,000 2,47,050/- - Share Capital – section 68 8. Landsky Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 31.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 - Share Capital – section 68 15 14 16,00,00,000 2,48,450/- - Advances – section

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. STAR LIGHT CONSUMER ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 6070/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1,738/- - Share Capital – section 68 7. Kasper Information Technology 28.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 Pvt. Ltd. 16 14 16,00,00,000 2,47,050/- - Share Capital – section 68 8. Landsky Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 31.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 - Share Capital – section 68 15 14 16,00,00,000 2,48,450/- - Advances – section

ITO, WARD-7(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELIGHT RESORTS P.LTD, GHAZIABAD

ITA 6401/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1,738/- - Share Capital – section 68 7. Kasper Information Technology 28.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 Pvt. Ltd. 16 14 16,00,00,000 2,47,050/- - Share Capital – section 68 8. Landsky Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 31.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 - Share Capital – section 68 15 14 16,00,00,000 2,48,450/- - Advances – section

ITO, WARD-7(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELIGHT RESORTS P.LTD, NEW DELHI

ITA 5974/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1,738/- - Share Capital – section 68 7. Kasper Information Technology 28.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 Pvt. Ltd. 16 14 16,00,00,000 2,47,050/- - Share Capital – section 68 8. Landsky Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 31.03.20 2013- 143(3) 22.09.2013 - Share Capital – section 68 15 14 16,00,00,000 2,48,450/- - Advances – section