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.

5 results for “section 68”+ Section 245clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi733Mumbai552Karnataka440Bangalore262Kolkata125Chennai122Ahmedabad106Jaipur103Indore90Chandigarh53Pune49Raipur41Cuttack39Ranchi35Hyderabad34Surat33Lucknow31Nagpur26Cochin25Rajkot23Guwahati21Visakhapatnam17Calcutta16SC14Agra8Jodhpur5Rajasthan4Telangana4Jabalpur3Amritsar2Allahabad1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Andhra Pradesh1Uttarakhand1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 1476Addition to Income5Section 153A4Section 2634Section 143(3)3Disallowance3Section 682Section 143(1)2Section 402Section 132

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
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 68

Section 68 cannot be read to show that in the case of failure of sub- creditors to prove their creditworthiness the amount advanced as loan to the assessee by the creditor shall have to be read as corollary as the income from undisclosed source of the assessee himself. vi] Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT

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
2
Section 143(1)
Section 147
Section 68

Section 68 cannot be read to show that in the case of failure of sub- creditors to prove their creditworthiness the amount advanced as loan to the assessee by the creditor shall have to be read as corollary as the income from undisclosed source of the assessee himself. vi] Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT

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

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

Section 269T restricts repayment of loan, deposit or specified advance if the amount exceeds Rs 20000 or more. In the instant case there has not been any repayment of the nature specified above. There is rather advancement by the assessee hence the provision of sec. 269T are not trigerred. Issue 4 Non examination of unsecured loan from Shri Virendra

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

sections is mandatory but consequential to Income. The A O is directed to allow consequential relief to the assessee while giving effect to this appeal order. 9 The fifth ground of appeal is as under "The Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings uis 274 and 271(1)(C) 9.1 The initiation of penalty is not appealable