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.

26 results for “section 68”+ Rectification u/s 154clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi341Mumbai261Bangalore149Indore123Chennai102Jaipur81Kolkata71Agra64Chandigarh49Ahmedabad40Pune40Lucknow33Hyderabad26Karnataka24Guwahati22Nagpur22Visakhapatnam18Rajkot17Surat17Raipur14Jodhpur8Dehradun7Allahabad6Cochin6Patna6Cuttack3Amritsar3Telangana3SC2Jabalpur2Ranchi2Varanasi1Uttarakhand1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 15437Section 143(3)31Section 153A21Section 143(1)19Addition to Income17Section 194H15Section 4013Disallowance12Section 153C10

DR. REDDYS LABORATORIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 1723/HYD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Years: 2007-08 Dr.Reddy’S Laboratories Vs. Dcit,Circle-17(1) Limited Hyderabad 8-2-337, Road No.3 Banjara Hills Hyderabad-500 034

For Appellant: Shri S.P.ChidambaramFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai,CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 80I

u/s 154 cannot be made is not accepted! the Appellant alternatively submits that, appropriate directions may be issued to the AO to allocate net corporate expenditure for the 8018 and 80le units, based on the Hon’ble ITAT order for the same year i.e., AY 2007-08 and thereby render justice. 9. In addition to the written submissions, he submitted

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2

Depreciation10
Rectification u/s 1549
Section 14A8

RAVI RAMBABU,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 651/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 651/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Ravi Rambabu, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Hyderabad. Of Income Tax, Circle-2(3), Pan: Abspr3702P Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 17/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 26/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Rectification Order Dated 28.03.2025 Passed By The Cit (Appeals) Under Section 154 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act"), Dated 28.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Cit(A) Disposing Of The Assessee’S Appeal, Vide His Order Dated 29.01.2025. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order Passed By The Cit(A)

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153CSection 154Section 68Section 69Section 69A

68 or section 69 or section 69A or section 69B or section 69C or section 69D of the Act are not applicable to the appellant's case and that charging of tax u/s 115BBE of the Act in the appellant's case is unlawful. 9. Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that

ITO, WARD-5(3),, HYDERABAD vs. SHRI KRISHNA KUMAR D SHAH, HUF, HYDERABAD

ITA 1605/HYD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri C.P. RamaswamyFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 154Section 158BSection 158CSection 246A(1)

rectification of patent, apparent and glaring mistakes. 11. The CIT(A) erred in holding that first and third applications under section 154 raised the issues which were not dealt within the assessment order and the appellate orders 12. The CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the entire addition of Rs. 14,32,38,499/- was considered and confirmed

ITO, WARD-5(3),, HYDERABAD vs. SHRI BRIJ GOPAL P SHAH, HUF,, HYDERABAD

ITA 1606/HYD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri C.P. RamaswamyFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 154Section 158BSection 158CSection 246A(1)

rectification of patent, apparent and glaring mistakes. 11. The CIT(A) erred in holding that first and third applications under section 154 raised the issues which were not dealt within the assessment order and the appellate orders 12. The CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the entire addition of Rs. 14,32,38,499/- was considered and confirmed

THATI SATISH KUMAR,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(12), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1176/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 115BSection 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 154

rectification order passed by the A.O. under Section 154 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on different grounds. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly decided the issue in accordance with law. Further, once the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order is pending before the Ld. CIT(A), then, in all fairness, this appeal may be set aside

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, three appeals i

ITA 972/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

rectification order passed by the ACIT/CPC u/s 154\ndated 27/09/2022 becomes infructuous. In our considered view, the\nobservation of the learned CIT (A) in para 6.2.8 of his order is beyond the\nscope of powers of the CIT (A) because, the CIT (A) does not have any\npower to give any direction or finding in respect of issues which

VK WAREHOUSING ENTERPRISES,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee firm and the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of our observations recorded hereinabove

ITA 737/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.737/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aakfv3288R (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.881/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Vs. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.A. राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri P. Dhivahar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234BSection 271(1)(b)Section 40Section 69Section 69CSection 801B

u/s 68 of the Act: Rs. 25,85,800/-. Accordingly, the AO, vide his order passed under Section 144 of the Act, dated 26/11/2019, converted the returned loss into a positive income of Rs. 3,37,78,220/-. 4. Subsequently, the AO passed a rectification order under Section 154

PRYSMIAN CAVI E SISTEMI S.R.L,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT (INT,TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1242/HYD/2024[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Jul 2025AY 2001-02
For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 263

u/s. 263 dated 13.03.2006, the Ld. AO passed order\nunder section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act on 29.03.2006, wherein\nhe estimated 5% profit on the offshore contract receipts of Rs.9,68,78,721/-\nresulting in an addition of Rs.48,43,936/-.\n4. Aggrieved, the assessee also filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)\nchallenging

ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD vs. VK WAREHOUSING ENTERPRISES, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee firm and\nthe revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of\nour observations recorded hereinabove

ITA 881/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nShri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.AFor Respondent: \nShri P. Dhivahar, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234BSection 271(1)(b)Section 40Section 69Section 69CSection 801B

u/s 68 of the Act: Rs. 25,85,800/-. Accordingly,\nthe AO, vide his order passed under Section 144 of the Act, dated\n26/11/2019, converted the returned loss into a positive income\nof Rs. 3,37,78,220/-\n4. Subsequently, the AO passed a rectification order under\nSection 154

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 1300/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

rectification order passed by the ACIT/CPC u/s 154\ndated 27/09/2022 becomes infructuous. In our considered view, the\nobservation of the learned CIT (A) in para 6.2.8 of his order is beyond the\nscope of powers of the CIT (A) because, the CIT (A) does not have any\npower to give any direction or finding in respect of issues which

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 973/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

rectification order passed by the ACIT/CPC u/s 154\ndated 27/09/2022 becomes infructuous. In our considered view, the\nobservation of the learned CIT (A) in para 6.2.8 of his order is beyond the\nscope of powers of the learned CIT (A) because, the CIT (A) does not have any\npower to give any direction or finding in respect of issues which

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 1301/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

rectification order passed by the ACIT/CPC u/s 154\ndated 27/09/2022 becomes infructuous. In our considered view, the\nobservation of the learned CIT (A) in para 6.2.8 of his order is beyond the\nscope of powers of the CIT (A) because, the CIT (A) does not have any\npower to give any direction or finding in respect of issues which

F5 NETWORKS INNOVATION PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 912/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Narender Kumar Naik
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 92C

rectification application under section 154 of the Act or appeal under section 246 of the Act. The assessee is required to choose the right course of action diligently which depends upon different facts and circumstances. 25.5 Nevertheless, the object for making the adjustment in the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act or framing the assessment under section

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. SRI CHAITANYA EDUCATIONAL COMMITTE, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 325/HYD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri AV Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)

154, thus arriving at a total income of Rs.26,11,20,759/-. It is however seen that the appellant has not filed any appeal against the said rectification order nor furnished any submissions with regard to the said addition in the present appellate proceedings. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant society was constituted

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(4), HYDERABAD vs. VISION VENTURE PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 782/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya
Section 143(3)Section 154

68,403/-( 265182735/ - 25,39,14,332) which requires to be added back to the total income.” 8. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the merits of the case had held that the above said order cannot be passed under section 154 of the Act and had allowed the appeal. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed

HIL LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 555/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghu Ram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

68,27,000 22. Ground No.1 is related to the weighted deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act. This issue is involved for the A.Y.2010-11 to 2013-14 for 4 assessment years. During the assessment proceedings, the AO found that the assessee has claimed the deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act to the extent of Rs.1

M/S HIL LIMITED(FORMERLY KNOWN AS HYDERABAD INDUSTRIES LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-2, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1703/HYD/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghu Ram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

68,27,000 22. Ground No.1 is related to the weighted deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act. This issue is involved for the A.Y.2010-11 to 2013-14 for 4 assessment years. During the assessment proceedings, the AO found that the assessee has claimed the deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act to the extent of Rs.1

HIL LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 647/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghu Ram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

68,27,000 22. Ground No.1 is related to the weighted deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act. This issue is involved for the A.Y.2010-11 to 2013-14 for 4 assessment years. During the assessment proceedings, the AO found that the assessee has claimed the deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act to the extent of Rs.1

M/S HIL LIMITED(FORMERLY KNOWN AS HYDERABAD INDUSTRIES LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-2, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1702/HYD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghu Ram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

68,27,000 22. Ground No.1 is related to the weighted deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act. This issue is involved for the A.Y.2010-11 to 2013-14 for 4 assessment years. During the assessment proceedings, the AO found that the assessee has claimed the deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act to the extent of Rs.1

M/S HIL LIMITED(FORMERLY KNOWN AS HYDERABAD INDUSTRIES LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-2, , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1701/HYD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghu Ram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

68,27,000 22. Ground No.1 is related to the weighted deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act. This issue is involved for the A.Y.2010-11 to 2013-14 for 4 assessment years. During the assessment proceedings, the AO found that the assessee has claimed the deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act to the extent of Rs.1