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.

4 results for “section 68”+ Section 148Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai208Delhi154Ahmedabad102Kolkata85Jaipur66Hyderabad37Rajkot36Surat31Bangalore25Pune24Visakhapatnam22Raipur22Indore18Chennai18Chandigarh17Nagpur14Guwahati10Agra8Lucknow7Jabalpur4Dehradun3Patna3Calcutta2SC1Uttarakhand1Allahabad1Karnataka1Jodhpur1Cochin1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 80P10Section 2508Section 1478Section 1488Addition to Income4Section 143(2)2Deduction2TDS2Disallowance2Limitation/Time-bar

JAGDISH PRASAD AGRAWAL,SEONI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, SEONI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 168/JAB/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Agrawal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 250

148A(d), based on the materials on the record. Perusing these orders, the ld. AO noticed that the assessee had made a allegedly bogus transaction of Rs.30,24,450/-, from Gunn Enterprises and Rs.33,57,128/-, from Parth International in the F.Y. 2015-16 and a bogus sales of Rs.1,13,37,168/-, from the bogus firm of Umesh Kumar

JAGDISH PRASAD AGRAWAL,SEONI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, SEONI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

2
Bogus Purchases2
Natural Justice2
ITA 167/JAB/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Agrawal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 250

148A(d), based on the materials on the record. Perusing these orders, the ld. AO noticed that the assessee had made a allegedly bogus transaction of Rs.30,24,450/-, from Gunn Enterprises and Rs.33,57,128/-, from Parth International in the F.Y. 2015-16 and a bogus sales of Rs.1,13,37,168/-, from the bogus firm of Umesh Kumar

BRAHTAKAR KRISHI SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,SAHAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JABALPUR

In the result, all the three appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 149/JAB/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sapan Usrethe, Advocate & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

148A of the IT Act and this issue is already decided by Hon'ble Apex court in the case of UOI Vs Ashish Agrawal and hence proceeding is liable to be quashed being invalid. 7. The AO was not justified in passing order under section 147 of the Act without appreciating that notice issued under section

BRAHTAKAR KRISHI SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,SAHAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JABALPUR

In the result, all the three appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 151/JAB/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sapan Usrethe, Advocate & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

148A of the IT Act and this issue is already decided by Hon'ble Apex court in the case of UOI Vs Ashish Agrawal and hence proceeding is liable to be quashed being invalid. 7. The AO was not justified in passing order under section 147 of the Act without appreciating that notice issued under section