Search: section 68 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

7 results for “section 68”+ Section 194clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi736 Mumbai552 Karnataka457 Bangalore197 Jaipur154 Kolkata122 Ahmedabad110 Chandigarh102 Chennai100 Hyderabad58 Calcutta51 Raipur46 Indore42 Cochin39 Pune30 Surat27 Amritsar21 Allahabad20 Guwahati18 Telangana18 Lucknow17 Cuttack15 Dehradun13 Rajkot10 SC8 Jodhpur7 Rajasthan6 Visakhapatnam5 Agra5 Nagpur5 Jabalpur3 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2 Kerala2 Varanasi2 Panaji1 Andhra Pradesh1 Ranchi1 Patna1

Key Topics

Section 153A12 Addition to Income7 Section 145(3)5 Section 142(1)4 Section 2504 Section 1324 Section 2634 Section 143(3)3 Section 143(2)3 Natural Justice

ITO, WARD, PHALODI, PHALODI vs. M/S RAMA ALLURE LLP, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 135/JODH/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: The Date, The Appeal Is Finally Heard.”

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

194 Taxman 43] (Annexure IV) “8. …the onus of proof is not a static one. Though in section 68

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)

3

Business Income2

Section 132

Section 145(3)

Section 153A

Section 234A

Section 250

section 132 and as per income tax rules 112 for such proceedings. The search party has commenced the search action in absence of any competent person of any of the company mentioned in the search warrant and further search warrant was not signed by any of the competent person. The search warrant was not shown to any competent person

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

section 145 are not found to\nbe relevant in the facts of this case. The AO has not disturbed the book results as the cash\ntransactions are not part of regular books of accounts.\nThe ld CIT(A) has also tried to distinguish the decisions relied upon. Thus on the\nbasis of above observations the ld. CIT(A) confirmed

SUKHDEV CHAYAL,BIKANER vs. PCIT-1,, JODHPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 26/JODH/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year: 2016-17 Sukhdev Chayal, Vs. Pr.Cit-1, Near Ratan Sagar Well, Jodhpur. Bikaner. Pan No. Afjpc 9250 J

Section 143(3)Section 263

194 of Rs.2,00,00,000/- as dividend from M/s. Kunjvarji Warehousing and Logistics Pvt. Ltd. The amount has not been declared by the assessee in his return of income under this head. Similarly, an amount of Rs.2,43,110/- has been received u/s 194lB from Shri Dhanpat Chayal. This amount has also not been shown/declared in the return

ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BIKANER vs. MUKESH SHAH, SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 399/JODH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur08 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24

Section 2(13) of the IT Act which reads as under: "Business" includes any trading, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture." The above definition has used the words 'trade' 'commerce' or 'manufacture' or "any adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture". The Hon'ble Gujarat

TARUN MURADIA,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

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

ITA 848/JODH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur23 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 132aSection 132tSection 143(2)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

68 on account of increase in share capital which was upheld by CIT(A) was not justified 2.2In the case of PCIT v/s MeetaGutgutia Prop. Ferns Patel &Ors 395 ITR 526(Del) held Search and Seizure—New scheme of assessment in search cases—Validity of invocation of Section 153A—On basis of documents recovered during search and seizure

MANGILAL DATLA,BANSWARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD BANSWARA, BANSWARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, both on legal issue\nas well as on facts

ITA 304/JODH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

68—CIT(A) confirmed reassessment and addition made by AO of share capital\nand unexplained cash credit—Held, notice u/s 148 could be quashed if ‘belief' was not bona fide\nor one based on vague, irrelevant and non-specific information—Basis of belief should be\ndiscernible from material on record which was available with AO when he recorded reasons—\nThere