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 43Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Ahmedabad29Mumbai13Kolkata10Bangalore7Delhi5Pune4Hyderabad4Jaipur4Lucknow2Amritsar2Cochin2Patna2Surat1Chandigarh1Jabalpur1Jodhpur1Karnataka1Raipur1SC1

Key Topics

Section 44A12Section 1315Addition to Income4Section 153A3Section 69A3Section 142(1)3Section 132(4)2Section 1322Section 143(2)2Cash Deposit

MUKESH SONI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(1), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 46/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Dheeraj Borad (CA)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

68 of the IT Act is in utter disregard of provisions of section- 4 of the IT Act which says that levy of Income tax is not on gross receipts but it is on profits and gain properly so called. 17. It is further submitted that profits and gains which are liable to be taxed u/s 28 are what

2
Deduction2

SHRI DINESH OJHA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6-4, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 40/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Apr 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 80C

sections 28 to 43C- Whether assessee's case could not be accepted Held, yes - Whether, however, since department had not placed any material on record to rebut finding of Commissioner (Appeals), order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) deleting addition made by Assessing Officer was to be upheld - Held yes” 17. The ld. AR relying to the written submission further made

HITESH KUMAR GUPTA,DAUSA vs. ITO, DAUSA

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

ITA 860/JPR/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Oct 2018AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (C.A) &For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 145(3)Section 147Section 44ASection 68

68,341/-. 6. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). It was contended before the Id. CIT(A) that the law gives relaxation to the assessee from maintenance of books of accounts. The diary was maintained by the assessee on memorandum basis and was not at all regularly and systematically maintained

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR vs. SHRI ALKESH PATNI, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 563/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Mar 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta, (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 28Section 44A

43C of the Act. Further, as per section 44AD(4), the provisions of Chapter XVII-C, which is relating to advance tax are not applicable when income is declared under section 44AD of the Act. Thus, the Legislature has made specific exclusion in section 44AD itself. Further, there is nothing in section 153A, which exclude applicability