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.

153 results for “section 68”+ Section 133(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,356Mumbai2,292Kolkata933Karnataka508Bangalore491Ahmedabad421Jaipur364Surat211Indore206Chennai197Pune197Chandigarh195Raipur189Hyderabad153Guwahati74Calcutta72Lucknow70Cochin69Rajkot61Amritsar57Nagpur56Ranchi47Visakhapatnam42Agra40Telangana39Cuttack34Patna25Allahabad21Jodhpur15Varanasi15SC12Dehradun11Rajasthan6Panaji4Orissa4Jabalpur3Punjab & Haryana1Andhra Pradesh1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Addition to Income74Section 153A56Section 6854Section 143(3)53Section 153B48Section 13237Disallowance20Search & Seizure19Cash Deposit19

GUPTA ASHOK KUMAR,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee allowed

ITA 376/HYD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: CA, P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR
Section 148Section 68

section 68 of the Act. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are as under. “43. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed on record. In this appeal revenue challenges the finding of the ld. CIT(A) raising two ground effectively dealing with the deletion of addition of Rs.1,75,00,364/-. The revenue state that

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. SILPA INFRATECH LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 153 · Page 1 of 8

...
Section 8018
Section 143(1)17
Section 14417
ITA 984/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 133(6)Section 68

133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) to the persons as per the list enclosed to the information furnished by the assessee. Some of such notice is issued and served and on being informed, the assessee furnished the replies from such persons. After considering such material and going through the confirmation letters, the learned Assessing

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1095/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2020-21
Section 153ASection 153BSection 2(31)Section 292C

133(6) and summons under section 131 confirming execution of work. It was also submitted that no material has been brought on record to establish that any amount has flown back to the assessee or that any commission income has been earned. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and the findings

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1093/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2018-19
Section 153ASection 153BSection 2(31)Section 292C

133(6) and summons under section 131 confirming execution of work. It was also submitted that no material has been brought on record to establish that any amount has flown back to the assessee or that any commission income has been earned. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and the findings

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1129/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2020-21
Section 153ASection 153BSection 2(31)Section 292C

133(6) and summons under section 131 confirming execution of work. It was also submitted that no material has been brought on record to establish that any amount has flown back to the assessee or that any commission income has been earned. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and the findings

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1090/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2015-16
Section 153ASection 153BSection 2(31)Section 292C

133(6) and summons under section 131 confirming execution of work. It was also submitted that no material has been brought on record to establish that any amount has flown back to the assessee or that any commission income has been earned. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and the findings

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1092/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2017-18
Section 153ASection 153BSection 2(31)Section 292C

133(6) and summons under section 131 confirming execution of work. It was also submitted that no material has been brought on record to establish that any amount has flown back to the assessee or that any commission income has been earned. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and the findings

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1126/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2017-18
Section 153ASection 153BSection 2(31)Section 292C

133(6) and summons under section 131 confirming execution of work. It was also submitted that no material has been brought on record to establish that any amount has flown back to the assessee or that any commission income has been earned. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and the findings

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1128/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2019-20
Section 153ASection 153BSection 2(31)Section 292C

133(6) and summons under section 131 confirming execution of work. It was also submitted that no material has been brought on record to establish that any amount has flown back to the assessee or that any commission income has been earned. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and the findings

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1094/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2019-20
Section 153ASection 153BSection 2(31)Section 292C

133(6) and summons under section 131 confirming execution of work. It was also submitted that no material has been brought on record to establish that any amount has flown back to the assessee or that any commission income has been earned. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and the findings

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1127/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2018-19
Section 153ASection 153BSection 2(31)Section 292C

133(6) and summons under section 131 confirming execution of work. It was also submitted that no material has been brought on record to establish that any amount has flown back to the assessee or that any commission income has been earned. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and the findings

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1125/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2016-17
Section 153ASection 153BSection 2(31)Section 292C

133(6) and summons under section 131 confirming execution of work. It was also submitted that no material has been brought on record to establish that any amount has flown back to the assessee or that any commission income has been earned. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and the findings

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1089/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2014-15
Section 153ASection 153BSection 2(31)Section 292C

133(6) and summons under section 131 confirming execution of work. It was also submitted that no material has been brought on record to establish that any amount has flown back to the assessee or that any commission income has been earned. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and the findings

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1091/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2016-17
Section 153ASection 153BSection 2(31)Section 292C

133(6) and summons under section 131 confirming execution of work. It was also submitted that no material has been brought on record to establish that any amount has flown back to the assessee or that any commission income has been earned. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and the findings

N. NEMICHAND JEWELLERS,,SECUNDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (2), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 133/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. M. Nemichand Vs. A.C.I.T. Jewellers Secunderabad Central Circle 1(2) Pan:Aacfm8833B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri Pawan Kumar Chakrapani Revenue By: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 15/07/2022 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.02.2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y. 2019-20. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Is Engaged In The Business Of Retail-Trading Of Gold Jewellery & Pawn Brokers. During The Course Of Vehicle Checking Duty Conducted During Parliament Elections, The Police Intercepted Shri Anil Kumar Jain At 8.30 P M On 20.02.2019 Near Subhan Bakery, Nampally, Hyderabad & Found A Bag Containing Cash Of Rs. 10,00,000/- While He Was Riding Honda Activa Bearing Reg. No.Ts10El1501 & Seized The Cash.

For Appellant: Sri Pawan Kumar ChakrapaniFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR
Section 131Section 132A(1)

68 of the I.T. Act. He submitted that in the interest of justice, the matter may be restored to the file of the CIT (A) with a direction to grant at least one opportunity to the assessee before deciding the change of head from section 69A to section 18 of the Act. 15. The learned

TARUN KUMAR GOYAL ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1)2, HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 457/HYD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sibendu Moharana, DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

133(6)/131 of the Act were issued to M/s Gold Line International Finvest Limited, but nothing emerged from this effort. The payment for the shares in question was made by Sh. Salasar Trading Company. Notice was issued to this entity as well, but when the notices were returned unserved, the AO did not take the matter any further

ARUN KUMAR GOYAL ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 458/HYD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sibendu Moharana, DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

133(6)/131 of the Act were issued to M/s Gold Line International Finvest Limited, but nothing emerged from this effort. The payment for the shares in question was made by Sh. Salasar Trading Company. Notice was issued to this entity as well, but when the notices were returned unserved, the AO did not take the matter any further

TARUN KUMAR GOYAL ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 456/HYD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sibendu Moharana, DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

133(6)/131 of the Act were issued to M/s Gold Line International Finvest Limited, but nothing emerged from this effort. The payment for the shares in question was made by Sh. Salasar Trading Company. Notice was issued to this entity as well, but when the notices were returned unserved, the AO did not take the matter any further

SURYANARAYANA GANDLA,ANANTAPUR vs. ACIT., CIRCLE - 1, ANANTAPUR.

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

ITA 1122/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1122/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Suryanarayana Gandla, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Tax, Circle-1, Anantapur. Anantapur. Pan: Abipg4005A (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasaad, C.A. राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 31/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M. :

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasaad, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 68

133(6) of the Act to verify the confirmations directly from the debtors, even though the names, ITA No.1122/Hyd/2025 6 addresses, and in several cases, PAN of debtors were available on record. Relying on the decision of this Tribunal in Ambabhavani Jettem v. ITO (ITA No. 604/Hyd/2024, A.Y. 2017–18, order dated 07.07.2025), where under identical facts the addition

ABDUL MUQEED MOHAMMED,WARANGAL. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, WARANGAL.

ITA 36/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

133(6) of the Act, observed that the assessee had failed to substantiate the genuineness of the subject transaction and the creditworthiness of the creditor. Accordingly, the AO held the credit entry appearing in the books of account of the assessee as an unexplained cash credit under section 68