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.

6 results for “section 68”+ Section 69Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Jaipur103Delhi93Mumbai71Chandigarh43Bangalore38Indore38Surat36Pune27Hyderabad22Rajkot22Chennai21Kolkata17Cochin16Ahmedabad14Amritsar13Ranchi11Raipur9Jodhpur6Lucknow5Cuttack5Visakhapatnam4Guwahati3Patna3Nagpur3Panaji2Jabalpur2Allahabad1SC1Kerala1Varanasi1Karnataka1

Key Topics

Section 115B14Addition to Income5Section 684Section 44A3Section 2503Section 143(3)3Section 80C2Section 1322Section 1392Business Income

MANJU GOYAL,BIKANER vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BIKANER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 891/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 115B

Section 68 to 69D and consequential application of Section 115BBE were unjustified. Accordingly, we hold that the surrendered

DR. MANISH CHHAPARWAL ,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

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

ITA 53/JODH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur10 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Kothari, Chartered Accountant
2
Unexplained Money2
Survey u/s 133A2
For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 250

section 115BBE the income in nature of incomes prescribed u/s 68 to 69D (even though not assessed as such

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

Bench: Shri Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 250Section 68

sections 68, 69, 69A to 69D of the Act. However, additions cannot be sustained merely on the basis of rough

SHRI SUMIT GAHLOT,BHILWARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BHILWARA

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

ITA 176/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad176/Jodh/2019 (Assessment Year- 2015-16) Vs Shri Sumit Gahlot, The Ito House No.22, Ganesh Ward-1, Colony, Gulpura, Bhilwara Bhilwara (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Bqapg9853L

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 28(1)Section 44ASection 68Section 80C

68 cannot be invoked as the assessee was not required to maintain the books of account. Since Section115BBE comes into operation only in case of income referred in Section 68/69/69A/69B/69C and 69D

RITU ROAD LINES,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-02, JODHPUR

Appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 34/JODH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur08 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.34/Jodh/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Ritu Road Lines, The Dcit, Plot No.12-14, Nakoda V Central Circle-2, Jodhpur. Industrial Area, Basni, S Jodhpur – 342001. Pan: Aaafr9440D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee By Shri Amit Kothari – Ar Revenue By Smt. Alka Rajvanshi Jain – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 16/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08/11/2023

Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 270A(1)

section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D. Therefore, we uphold Assessing Officer’s action of invoking provisions of section

BHOOP SINGH POONIA,NOHAR vs. ITO WARD, NOHAR, NOHAR

ITA 405/JODH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Jun 2025AY 2014-15
Section 133A

section 68, 69, 69A, 69B\n& 69C is not apparent from the impugned order. Merely stating that excess\ncash is clearly covered u/s 68 or 69A, excess stock is covered u/s 69 or 69B,\nconstruction of Shed/Godown is covered u/s 69B or 69C and advances made\nto Sundry Parties is covered u/s 69, 69B or 69D