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.

39 results for “section 68”+ Section 144(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,535Mumbai1,424Kolkata503Karnataka499Ahmedabad422Bangalore381Jaipur371Chennai350Hyderabad277Surat183Chandigarh182Indore164Pune160Raipur144Rajkot120Cochin114Amritsar91Lucknow66Nagpur63Calcutta54Patna53Visakhapatnam53Agra52Guwahati51Allahabad40Telangana40Jodhpur39Cuttack26SC25Jabalpur18Dehradun16Ranchi10Panaji9Varanasi8Rajasthan5Orissa5Uttarakhand1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 14732Addition to Income31Section 14828Section 14425Section 133A20Section 6820Natural Justice19Disallowance15Survey u/s 133A13Condonation of Delay

SAMPAT LAL LODHA ,NATHDWARA vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2/JODH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Aug 2023AY 2011-12
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 68

68 of the Act and disallowance of interest for an amount of Rs. 3,16,663/-. 5. Feeling dissatisfied from the order of the assessing officer assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). A propose to the grounds so raised the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) is reiterated here in below: “7.1 In the case

SAMPAT LAL LODHA ,NATHDWARA vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1/JODH/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Showing 1–20 of 39 · Page 1 of 2

13
Section 26312
Section 143(3)11
Section 143(1)
Section 147
Section 68

68 of the Act and disallowance of interest for an amount of Rs. 3,16,663/-. 5. Feeling dissatisfied from the order of the assessing officer assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). A propose to the grounds so raised the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) is reiterated here in below: “7.1 In the case

SITA DEVI CHOUDHARY,AHORE JALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALORE

In the result, stands allowed

ITA 115/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Cit(A) Challenging The Additions Made By The Ao. The Ld.Cit(A) Upheld Both The Additions Made By Observing-

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69A

section 68 as under – (28) That another fact is that the H That another fact is that the Hon’ble Commissioner Appeal while passing order on’ble Commissioner Appeal while passing order had duly acknowledged that copies of confirmation of accounts was duly furnished but had duly acknowledged that copies of confirmation of accounts was duly furnished

M/S. SUPER SHIV SHAKTI MINCHEM PVT. LTD.,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3, , BHILWARA

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 20/JODH/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Jun 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Goutam Chand Baid, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT (Sr. D.R)
Section 147Section 148Section 6Section 68Section 69C

144 and 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2009–10. 2. Since the issues involved in both the above appeals are common and were heard together, therefore, they are being disposed off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. We shall take ITA No. 21/Chd/2018

M/S. SUPER SHIV SHAKTI MINCHEM PVT. LTD.,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3, , BHILWARA

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 21/JODH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Goutam Chand Baid, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT (Sr. D.R)
Section 147Section 148Section 6Section 68Section 69C

144 and 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2009–10. 2. Since the issues involved in both the above appeals are common and were heard together, therefore, they are being disposed off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. We shall take ITA No. 21/Chd/2018

MR. NEERAJ PALIWAL,RAJSAMAND vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 11/JODH/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 144Section 147Section 253(3)Section 68

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short]. 2. The hearing of the appeals was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. In all these appeals, the assessee has raised certain common grounds of appeal, thus all the appeals were clubbed together, heard

MR. NEERAJ PALIWAL,RAJSAMAND vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 10/JODH/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Nov 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 144Section 147Section 253(3)Section 68

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short]. 2. The hearing of the appeals was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. In all these appeals, the assessee has raised certain common grounds of appeal, thus all the appeals were clubbed together, heard

MR. NEERAJ PALIWAL,RAJSAMAND vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 9/JODH/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Nov 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 144Section 147Section 253(3)Section 68

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short]. 2. The hearing of the appeals was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. In all these appeals, the assessee has raised certain common grounds of appeal, thus all the appeals were clubbed together, heard

MR. NEERAJ PALIWAL,RAJSAMAND vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 8/JODH/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Nov 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 144Section 147Section 253(3)Section 68

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short]. 2. The hearing of the appeals was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. In all these appeals, the assessee has raised certain common grounds of appeal, thus all the appeals were clubbed together, heard

MR. NEERAJ PALIWAL,RAJSAMAND vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 7/JODH/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Nov 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 144Section 147Section 253(3)Section 68

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short]. 2. The hearing of the appeals was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. In all these appeals, the assessee has raised certain common grounds of appeal, thus all the appeals were clubbed together, heard

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDIAPUR, UDAIPUR

ITA 709/JODH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

3 (PB ) calculation of revenue recognition. The cost of construction appearing at Annexure-B. Rs.13,08,75,000/- already considered at the time of filing of return of income and such amount was based on the calculation made as per above annexure “A’ only. Hence the annexure “A” was as part of documents instead of treating the same as incriminating

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDIPUR vs. M/S. U.N. AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD., UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 70/JODH/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur18 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Mohan, JCIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Chand Baid, CA
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 194ASection 194CSection 194HSection 194J

Section 144 as a best judgment assessment owing to the failure on the part of the assessee to file its return of income and getting its books of accounts audited. The gross receipts of Rs.25,54,88,102 are also not in dispute which has been 9 DCIT vs. U.N. Automobiles Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur- AY: 2013-14 adopted

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

ITA 706/JODH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 May 2025AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

3. Aggrieved with the order of the AO, assessee filed appeal before the ld.\nCIT(A). During the course of appellate proceedings assessee has filed the detailed\nwritten submission which is available at Paper Book (A.Y. 2013-14) pages 268 to\n320 and also filed the additional common written submission available at Paper\n37\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana

VINAY MITTAL,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, SRIGANGANAGAR

The appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 382/JODH/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blevinay Mittal Income Tax Officer, 3, J Block, Sriganganagar (Raj.) Ward No. -1, Ward No. 1 Keshrisinghpur Sriganganagar Sriganganagar Pan No. Avopm6894P Assessee By Shri Virendra Jain, Advocate (Physical) Revenue By Shri P.M. Mirdha, Addl. Cit- Dr (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The Nfac/ Cit (A)] Dated 22.03.2024 With Respect To Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Appellant Assessee Has Taken Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 145Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 280Section 44ASection 68

144 are bad in law and bad on facts. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition u/s 68 of Rs. 96,13,761/- on account of increase in unsecured loans in comparison to previous year. The Assessee could not submit his submission. All the unsecured loans taken during the year is genuine and fair

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

144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5.6 For the purpose of estimating net profit, the A.O noted that the average of the net profit rate declared by the assessee in the three years, immediately preceding the year under consideration, was 7.6% as under- AY 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 NP rate 9.76 5.81 7.23 Average Net 7.6% Profit

ADARSH CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. ,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 9/JODH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, HonʼBle & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

Section 144Section 86

3. At the time of hearing the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that Sh. Hirabhai Somabhai Patel (Retd. IAS) was appointed as the official liquidator of Adarsh Credit Co-Operative Society Limited vide order dated 6th December 2018 issued under section 86 of the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002. However, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court

ADARSH CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD. vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 5/JODH/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, HonʼBle & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

Section 144Section 86

section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, invoking provisions of best judgement, an ex-parte order qua the assessee society where the Assessment order indicated the address as ADARSH PRINTER BHAWAN RAJMATA DHARAMSALA, SIROHI 307001, Rajasthan, India, which was seized to be the registered office after appointment of the Official Liquidator. And thus, the order was never communicated

ADARSH CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. ,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 10/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon'Ble & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

Section 144Section 86

3. At the time of hearing the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that Sh. Hirabhai Somabhai Patel (Retd. IAS) was appointed as the official liquidator of Adarsh Credit Co-Operative Society Limited vide order dated 6th December 2018 issued under section 86 of the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002. However, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court

ADARSH CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. ,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 11/JODH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon'Ble & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

Section 144Section 86

section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, invoking provisions of best judgement, an ex-parte order qua the assessee society where the Assessment order indicated the address as ADARSH PRINTER BHAWAN RAJMATA DHARAMSALA, SIROHI 307001, Rajasthan, India, which was seized to be the registered office after appointment of the Official Liquidator. And thus, the order was never communicated

ADARSH CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7/JODH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, HonʼBle & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

Section 144Section 86

3. At the time of hearing the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that Sh. Hirabhai Somabhai Patel (Retd. IAS) was appointed as the official liquidator of Adarsh Credit Co-Operative Society Limited vide order dated 6th December 2018 issued under section 86 of the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002. However, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court