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.

13 results for “section 68”+ Section 108clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,041Mumbai979Karnataka552Bangalore318Ahmedabad229Chennai223Jaipur218Hyderabad209Indore196Kolkata164Pune121Cochin103Chandigarh98Agra85Surat81Rajkot64Calcutta60Telangana58Raipur57Nagpur48Cuttack41Visakhapatnam33Lucknow28Guwahati15Amritsar14Allahabad14SC13Jodhpur13Patna7Orissa6Rajasthan5Punjab & Haryana2Jabalpur2Andhra Pradesh1Ranchi1Dehradun1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 26316Section 13915Addition to Income12Section 153A8Section 1328Section 143(3)8Section 687Section 250(6)6Section 69C6Disallowance

SHRI BHANWAR LAL,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result the appeals of the assessee ITA Nos

ITA 417/JODH/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Jun 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

section 132(4) of the Act raises only a rebuttable presumption and,\nabsent corroborative evidence of actual payment, cannot alone form the foundation\nfor an addition toward unexplained investment. The Ld. DR has cited no contrary\nauthority to rebut these propositions. The impugned addition, being predicated solely\non assumption and presumption, therefore cannot stand. Accordingly, we set aside\nthe

3
Deduction3
Set Off of Losses3

AJMER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AJMER vs. CIT(EXEMPTION)/ ITO (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR / JODHPUR

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 89/JODH/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

108 (Bom), law on this aspect was discussed in the following manner (page 113): ". . . From a reading of sub- section (1) of section 263, it is clear that the power of suo motu revision can be exercised by the Commissioner only if, on examination of the records of any proceedings under this Act, he considers that any order

M/S TARUN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,WARD NO.24, NEAR BHAGAT SINGH CHOWK, SURATGARH vs. CPC, BANGALORE/ ITO, WARD-1, SRIGANGANAGAR , SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 108/JODH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR
Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

108 & 109/Jodh/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 (Through Virtual Mode) M/s. Tarun Construction Co., Versus Income-tax Officer, Ward No. 24, Near Bhagat Singh Ward-1(1), Sriganganagar. Chowk, Suratgarh. PAN: AAIFT5316J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.A. Revenue by : Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR Date of hearing : 18.09.2023 Date of pronouncement: 21.09.2023 ORDER These appeals

M/S TARUN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,WARD NO.24, NEAR BHAGAT SINGH CHOWK, SURATGARH vs. CPC, BANGALORE/ ITO, WARD-1, SRIGANGANAGAR, SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 109/JODH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR
Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

108 & 109/Jodh/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 (Through Virtual Mode) M/s. Tarun Construction Co., Versus Income-tax Officer, Ward No. 24, Near Bhagat Singh Ward-1(1), Sriganganagar. Chowk, Suratgarh. PAN: AAIFT5316J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.A. Revenue by : Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR Date of hearing : 18.09.2023 Date of pronouncement: 21.09.2023 ORDER These appeals

SUNITA AGARWAL,BIKANER vs. PCIT-1, JODHPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 25/JODH/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Sh. Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year: 2016-17 Sunita Agarwal, Vs. Pr.Cit-1, 98, Industrial Area, Jodhpur. Bikaner. Pan No. Aeopa 9467 R

Section 115Section 131Section 143(3)Section 263

68 TO 73).Further query relating to investment was raised at the time of statement recorded u/s 131 during survey. Your kind attention is drawn to the statement recorded during survey proceedings wherein the various in depth queries were raised and replied in comprehensive manner. Further assessing officer during assessment proceedings appreciated the statement and impounded material in the backdrop

ACIT, PAOTA C ROAD vs. VARAHA INFRA LIMITED, PAOTA B ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 160/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaithe Acit Vs M/S. Vardha Infra Ltd. Room No. 215, Aayakar Bhawan 6 Jalam Vilas Scheme Paota C Road, Jodhpur Paota B Road, Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccv 7972 K

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

108/-), guest entertainment expenses (Rs. 27,45,595/-), travelling and conveyance (Rs. 1,33,23,009/-) it was found that most of the expenses were incurred in cash for which proper details has not been either maintained or filed during the course of the assessment proceedings. The assessee had also not maintained site-wise stock register of consumable goods debited

DCIT, CENTRAL CICLE-1, JODHPUR vs. SANJAY SINGHAL, MOUNT ABU

In the result, the appeals of assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 101/JODH/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68Section 69C

108 to 110/Jodh/2022 A.Ys.: 2013-14 to 2015-16 Rajkumari Singhal, Main Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Market Mount Abu Rajasthan Income Tax, Central [PAN: ALDPS4874J] Circle-1,Jodhpur. (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. Surendra Mehta, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Lovish Kumar, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 19.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 21.12.2023 I.T.A. Nos. 111 to 112/Jodh/2022 & Ors 2 ORDER

SANJAY SINGHAL,MOUNT ABU vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals of assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 112/JODH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68Section 69C

108 to 110/Jodh/2022 A.Ys.: 2013-14 to 2015-16 Rajkumari Singhal, Main Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Market Mount Abu Rajasthan Income Tax, Central [PAN: ALDPS4874J] Circle-1,Jodhpur. (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. Surendra Mehta, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Lovish Kumar, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 19.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 21.12.2023 I.T.A. Nos. 111 to 112/Jodh/2022 & Ors 2 ORDER

RAJKUMARI SINGHAL,MOUNT ABU vs. DCIT,. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals of assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 109/JODH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68Section 69C

108 to 110/Jodh/2022 A.Ys.: 2013-14 to 2015-16 Rajkumari Singhal, Main Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Market Mount Abu Rajasthan Income Tax, Central [PAN: ALDPS4874J] Circle-1,Jodhpur. (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. Surendra Mehta, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Lovish Kumar, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 19.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 21.12.2023 I.T.A. Nos. 111 to 112/Jodh/2022 & Ors 2 ORDER

RAJ KUMARI SINGHAL,MOUNT ABU vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals of assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 108/JODH/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68Section 69C

108 to 110/Jodh/2022 A.Ys.: 2013-14 to 2015-16 Rajkumari Singhal, Main Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Market Mount Abu Rajasthan Income Tax, Central [PAN: ALDPS4874J] Circle-1,Jodhpur. (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. Surendra Mehta, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Lovish Kumar, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 19.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 21.12.2023 I.T.A. Nos. 111 to 112/Jodh/2022 & Ors 2 ORDER

RAJKUMARI SINGHAL,MOUNT ABU vs. DCIT,. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals of assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 110/JODH/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68Section 69C

108 to 110/Jodh/2022 A.Ys.: 2013-14 to 2015-16 Rajkumari Singhal, Main Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Market Mount Abu Rajasthan Income Tax, Central [PAN: ALDPS4874J] Circle-1,Jodhpur. (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. Surendra Mehta, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Lovish Kumar, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 19.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 21.12.2023 I.T.A. Nos. 111 to 112/Jodh/2022 & Ors 2 ORDER

SANJAY SINGHAL,MOUNT ABU vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals of assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 111/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68Section 69C

108 to 110/Jodh/2022 A.Ys.: 2013-14 to 2015-16 Rajkumari Singhal, Main Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Market Mount Abu Rajasthan Income Tax, Central [PAN: ALDPS4874J] Circle-1,Jodhpur. (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. Surendra Mehta, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Lovish Kumar, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 19.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 21.12.2023 I.T.A. Nos. 111 to 112/Jodh/2022 & Ors 2 ORDER

SHRI JITENDRA OJHA ,SIROHI vs. ITO,, SIROHI

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 484/JODH/2018[Shri Jitendra Ojha ]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur19 Mar 2020

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Accountant Mrmber Shri Jiterndra Ojha Vs The Ito, S/O Sh. Mangi Lal Ojha , Sirohi. Chhoti Brahmpuri, Sirohi.

Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 149Section 153Section 153ASection 153C

108 (Mad.)- Gitsons Engineering Co. Vs. CIT. 4. The without prejudice to the generality of the ground No. 1 & 2above. It is alternatively urged that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned reopening of the asset invoking Sec. 147 to 151 was without jurisdiction and contrary to the legal provisions contained in Sec. 153C read with