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.

471 results for “section 68”+ Section 251clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi793Mumbai735Karnataka471Ahmedabad214Jaipur198Bangalore195Chennai129Hyderabad104Kolkata103Raipur102Chandigarh102Surat95Pune66Indore66Cochin59Rajkot44Nagpur44Lucknow40Guwahati35Telangana35Visakhapatnam24Calcutta19Patna13Amritsar12Cuttack10Allahabad9Panaji9Jodhpur8Agra7Dehradun7Rajasthan5Kerala5Ranchi4SC4Jabalpur4Varanasi4Orissa3Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 26036Addition to Income29Section 48212Section 712Section 1488Section 139(1)4Section 1534Section 153A4Revision u/s 2634Section 260A

M/S FIDELITY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/512/2017HC Karnataka23 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 2(22)(e)Section 254Section 260

68 of the Act appears to have been done without affording a specific opportunity Date of Judgment :23-07-2018 I.T.A.No.512/2017 M/s. Fidelity Business Services India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, & Anr. 22/86 of hearing to the assessee and that appears to be the reason for setting aside of that Order of the Tribunal

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA (HUF)

The appeals are allowed

ITA/5038/2009HC Karnataka13 Aug 2012

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

Showing 1–20 of 471 · Page 1 of 24

...
3
Section 139(1)Section 148Section 153Section 260

68,765/- (shares of Rs. One Crore) (40,00,000) equity share of Rs.10 each of face value of M/s. Kamal Overseas Ltd., acquired at Rs.2.5 per share, cash Rs.40,00,000/- and paid a sum of Rs.6,63,20,630/- as tax at 30%. He was called upon to show the source of income; the persons to whom

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA, M/S BELLARY STEEL ROLING MILLS,

The appeals are allowed

ITA/5034/2009HC Karnataka13 Aug 2012

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 153Section 260

68,765/- (shares of Rs. One Crore) (40,00,000) equity share of Rs.10 each of face value of M/s. Kamal Overseas Ltd., acquired at Rs.2.5 per share, cash Rs.40,00,000/- and paid a sum of Rs.6,63,20,630/- as tax at 30%. He was called upon to show the source of income; the persons to whom

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.PARVATHI MADHAVA

The appeals are allowed

ITA/5037/2009HC Karnataka13 Aug 2012

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 153Section 260

68,765/- (shares of Rs. One Crore) (40,00,000) equity share of Rs.10 each of face value of M/s. Kamal Overseas Ltd., acquired at Rs.2.5 per share, cash Rs.40,00,000/- and paid a sum of Rs.6,63,20,630/- as tax at 30%. He was called upon to show the source of income; the persons to whom

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA (HUF)

The appeals are allowed

ITA/5036/2009HC Karnataka13 Aug 2012

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 153Section 260

68,765/- (shares of Rs. One Crore) (40,00,000) equity share of Rs.10 each of face value of M/s. Kamal Overseas Ltd., acquired at Rs.2.5 per share, cash Rs.40,00,000/- and paid a sum of Rs.6,63,20,630/- as tax at 30%. He was called upon to show the source of income; the persons to whom

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA, M/S BELLARY STEEL ROLING MILLS,

The appeals are allowed

ITA/5035/2009HC Karnataka13 Aug 2012

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 153Section 260

68,765/- (shares of Rs. One Crore) (40,00,000) equity share of Rs.10 each of face value of M/s. Kamal Overseas Ltd., acquired at Rs.2.5 per share, cash Rs.40,00,000/- and paid a sum of Rs.6,63,20,630/- as tax at 30%. He was called upon to show the source of income; the persons to whom

SRI G LALANATHA REDDY vs. THE ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/178/2022HC Karnataka09 Oct 2025

Bench: D K SINGH,VENKATESH NAIK T

Section 260

68 OF 2022 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 71 OF 2022 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 86 OF 2022 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 121 OF 2022 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 177 OF 2022 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 292 OF 2022 AND INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 305 OF 2022 IN ITA No. 178/2022: BETWEEN: 1. SRI G LALANATHA REDDY AGED 45 YEARS

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ATRIA WIND (KADAMBUR) PVT LTD

ITA/103/2025HC Karnataka03 Sept 2025

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2Section 260Section 260ASection 47

Section 153A of the Act was issued. The Assessing Officer [AO] determined the total income of the assessee at ₹1,89,11,81,757/-. The said determination was based on an addition of a sum of ₹1,91,95,68,251

SMT. M R PRABHAVATHY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WTA/1/2019HC Karnataka04 Mar 2020

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice K.Natarajan Election Petition No.1 Of 2019 Connected With Election Petition No.2 Of 2019

Section 81

Section 33A of RP Act and 106 he has committed corrupt practice of bribery as contemplated under Sections 123(1)(A), 123(1)(B), 123(7), 123(7)(b), 123(vii)(d), 123(7)(h) and Section 123(8), 123(3), 3A and 123(6) of R.P. Act ? The petitioner in E.P. No.2/2019 has contended that respondent

MR ASHWIN SRIDHAR vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/11951/2021HC Karnataka08 Nov 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

251, RELIAABLE LIFESTYLE, HARALUR, BANGALORE 560 102. 16. MS. ADITYA AGADI, S/O MR. HARISH AGADI, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 1016, A BLOCK, KOMARLA BRIGADE RESIDENCY, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, NEAR SHANI TEMPLE, CHIKKALASANDRA, BANGALORE 560 061. 17. MS. SADHANA WARRIER, D/O MR. NANDIKKARA DINESYH WARRIER, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 5104, NANDI PARK, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 083. 18. MS. SAIVIDYA SIVASANKAR

NIKHITA BHASKAR GOWDA vs. UNION OF INDIA

WP/12071/2021HC Karnataka08 Nov 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

251, RELIAABLE LIFESTYLE, HARALUR, BANGALORE 560 102. 16. MS. ADITYA AGADI, S/O MR. HARISH AGADI, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 1016, A BLOCK, KOMARLA BRIGADE RESIDENCY, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, NEAR SHANI TEMPLE, CHIKKALASANDRA, BANGALORE 560 061. 17. MS. SADHANA WARRIER, D/O MR. NANDIKKARA DINESYH WARRIER, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 5104, NANDI PARK, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 083. 18. MS. SAIVIDYA SIVASANKAR

MR.VIVEK NAIR vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/13081/2021HC Karnataka08 Nov 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

251, RELIAABLE LIFESTYLE, HARALUR, BANGALORE 560 102. 16. MS. ADITYA AGADI, S/O MR. HARISH AGADI, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 1016, A BLOCK, KOMARLA BRIGADE RESIDENCY, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, NEAR SHANI TEMPLE, CHIKKALASANDRA, BANGALORE 560 061. 17. MS. SADHANA WARRIER, D/O MR. NANDIKKARA DINESYH WARRIER, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 5104, NANDI PARK, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 083. 18. MS. SAIVIDYA SIVASANKAR

MR MUKUND RAO vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/12337/2021HC Karnataka08 Nov 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

251, RELIAABLE LIFESTYLE, HARALUR, BANGALORE 560 102. 16. MS. ADITYA AGADI, S/O MR. HARISH AGADI, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 1016, A BLOCK, KOMARLA BRIGADE RESIDENCY, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, NEAR SHANI TEMPLE, CHIKKALASANDRA, BANGALORE 560 061. 17. MS. SADHANA WARRIER, D/O MR. NANDIKKARA DINESYH WARRIER, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 5104, NANDI PARK, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 083. 18. MS. SAIVIDYA SIVASANKAR

ARUSHI MISHRA vs. UNION OF INDIA

WP/12849/2021HC Karnataka08 Nov 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

251, RELIAABLE LIFESTYLE, HARALUR, BANGALORE 560 102. 16. MS. ADITYA AGADI, S/O MR. HARISH AGADI, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 1016, A BLOCK, KOMARLA BRIGADE RESIDENCY, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, NEAR SHANI TEMPLE, CHIKKALASANDRA, BANGALORE 560 061. 17. MS. SADHANA WARRIER, D/O MR. NANDIKKARA DINESYH WARRIER, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 5104, NANDI PARK, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 083. 18. MS. SAIVIDYA SIVASANKAR

ALEKHYA PONNEKANTI vs. UNION OF INDIA

WP/11504/2021HC Karnataka08 Nov 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

251, RELIAABLE LIFESTYLE, HARALUR, BANGALORE 560 102. 16. MS. ADITYA AGADI, S/O MR. HARISH AGADI, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 1016, A BLOCK, KOMARLA BRIGADE RESIDENCY, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, NEAR SHANI TEMPLE, CHIKKALASANDRA, BANGALORE 560 061. 17. MS. SADHANA WARRIER, D/O MR. NANDIKKARA DINESYH WARRIER, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 5104, NANDI PARK, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 083. 18. MS. SAIVIDYA SIVASANKAR

ANAGHA MURALIDHARAN vs. THE UNION OF INDIA

WP/12722/2021HC Karnataka08 Nov 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

251, RELIAABLE LIFESTYLE, HARALUR, BANGALORE 560 102. 16. MS. ADITYA AGADI, S/O MR. HARISH AGADI, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 1016, A BLOCK, KOMARLA BRIGADE RESIDENCY, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, NEAR SHANI TEMPLE, CHIKKALASANDRA, BANGALORE 560 061. 17. MS. SADHANA WARRIER, D/O MR. NANDIKKARA DINESYH WARRIER, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 5104, NANDI PARK, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 083. 18. MS. SAIVIDYA SIVASANKAR

MS.SHRIYA ANIL vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/17127/2021HC Karnataka08 Nov 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

251, RELIAABLE LIFESTYLE, HARALUR, BANGALORE 560 102. 16. MS. ADITYA AGADI, S/O MR. HARISH AGADI, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 1016, A BLOCK, KOMARLA BRIGADE RESIDENCY, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, NEAR SHANI TEMPLE, CHIKKALASANDRA, BANGALORE 560 061. 17. MS. SADHANA WARRIER, D/O MR. NANDIKKARA DINESYH WARRIER, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 5104, NANDI PARK, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 083. 18. MS. SAIVIDYA SIVASANKAR

YASHASWINI DHARMALAPA VISHWANATH vs. UNION OF INDIA

WP/12419/2021HC Karnataka08 Nov 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

251, RELIAABLE LIFESTYLE, HARALUR, BANGALORE 560 102. 16. MS. ADITYA AGADI, S/O MR. HARISH AGADI, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 1016, A BLOCK, KOMARLA BRIGADE RESIDENCY, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, NEAR SHANI TEMPLE, CHIKKALASANDRA, BANGALORE 560 061. 17. MS. SADHANA WARRIER, D/O MR. NANDIKKARA DINESYH WARRIER, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 5104, NANDI PARK, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 083. 18. MS. SAIVIDYA SIVASANKAR

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ENNOBLE CONSTRUCTION

ITA/383/2016HC Karnataka20 Jul 2022

Bench: KRISHNA S.DIXIT,P.KRISHNA BHAT

Section 260Section 260A

68,28,574/- allegedly paid to ‘Transport Creditors’. During the course of Scrutiny Assessment Proceedings, the Assessment Officer (hereinafter ‘AO’) had asked the Assessee to furnish details of Transport Creditors to whom the payment was made. The Assessee expressed his inability to produce any documents contending that his entire business office having been raided all books files, registers, etc have

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. M/S OBULAPURAM MINING

ITA/100091/2016HC Karnataka17 Mar 2023

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 37

251 ITR 84 SC is of the view that the word substantial qualifies the term question of law, it means a question having substance, essential, real or sound worth, important or considerable. The substantial question of law on which an appeal shall be heard need not necessarily be a question of law of general importance. To be substantial, a question