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.

7 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 69Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi54Mumbai51Hyderabad38Bangalore22Jaipur10Chennai9Lucknow7Amritsar7Ahmedabad7Chandigarh3Kolkata2Nagpur1Cochin1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 6921Section 132A7Section 133A7Unexplained Investment7Addition to Income7Search & Seizure7Survey u/s 133A7Undisclosed Income7Natural Justice

(SMT.) ANJU SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals for assessment year 2003-04 to 2008-09

ITA 393/LKW/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri. T.S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Madhuk, CIT (DR)
Section 132ASection 133ASection 69

69C were furnished, therefore, the benefit of the so called surrender made by Shri K.N. Singh Patel cannot be allowed and the addition of Rs.2,50,000/- made is hereby confirmed, as no evidence for the source of acquisition of these household goods was furnished and the assets have been valued at Rs.10,00,000/- and have been equally considered

(SMT.) ANJU SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

7

In the result, the appeals for assessment year 2003-04 to 2008-09

ITA 390/LKW/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Mar 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri. T.S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Madhuk, CIT (DR)
Section 132ASection 133ASection 69

69C were furnished, therefore, the benefit of the so called surrender made by Shri K.N. Singh Patel cannot be allowed and the addition of Rs.2,50,000/- made is hereby confirmed, as no evidence for the source of acquisition of these household goods was furnished and the assets have been valued at Rs.10,00,000/- and have been equally considered

(SMT.) ANJU SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals for assessment year 2003-04 to 2008-09

ITA 392/LKW/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri. T.S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Madhuk, CIT (DR)
Section 132ASection 133ASection 69

69C were furnished, therefore, the benefit of the so called surrender made by Shri K.N. Singh Patel cannot be allowed and the addition of Rs.2,50,000/- made is hereby confirmed, as no evidence for the source of acquisition of these household goods was furnished and the assets have been valued at Rs.10,00,000/- and have been equally considered

(SMT.) ANJU SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals for assessment year 2003-04 to 2008-09

ITA 394/LKW/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri. T.S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Madhuk, CIT (DR)
Section 132ASection 133ASection 69

69C were furnished, therefore, the benefit of the so called surrender made by Shri K.N. Singh Patel cannot be allowed and the addition of Rs.2,50,000/- made is hereby confirmed, as no evidence for the source of acquisition of these household goods was furnished and the assets have been valued at Rs.10,00,000/- and have been equally considered

(SMT.) ANJU SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals for assessment year 2003-04 to 2008-09

ITA 396/LKW/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri. T.S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Madhuk, CIT (DR)
Section 132ASection 133ASection 69

69C were furnished, therefore, the benefit of the so called surrender made by Shri K.N. Singh Patel cannot be allowed and the addition of Rs.2,50,000/- made is hereby confirmed, as no evidence for the source of acquisition of these household goods was furnished and the assets have been valued at Rs.10,00,000/- and have been equally considered

(SMT.) ANJU SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals for assessment year 2003-04 to 2008-09

ITA 391/LKW/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Mar 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri. T.S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Madhuk, CIT (DR)
Section 132ASection 133ASection 69

69C were furnished, therefore, the benefit of the so called surrender made by Shri K.N. Singh Patel cannot be allowed and the addition of Rs.2,50,000/- made is hereby confirmed, as no evidence for the source of acquisition of these household goods was furnished and the assets have been valued at Rs.10,00,000/- and have been equally considered

(SMT.) ANJU SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals for assessment year 2003-04 to 2008-09

ITA 395/LKW/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri. T.S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Madhuk, CIT (DR)
Section 132ASection 133ASection 69

69C were furnished, therefore, the benefit of the so called surrender made by Shri K.N. Singh Patel cannot be allowed and the addition of Rs.2,50,000/- made is hereby confirmed, as no evidence for the source of acquisition of these household goods was furnished and the assets have been valued at Rs.10,00,000/- and have been equally considered