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.

2,703 results for “section 68”+ Section 132(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi3,483Mumbai2,703Bangalore729Jaipur647Chennai606Hyderabad561Karnataka507Ahmedabad472Kolkata349Chandigarh305Pune284Indore227Cochin179Surat174Raipur157Visakhapatnam149Nagpur127Rajkot105Guwahati101Amritsar65Calcutta55Lucknow52Telangana50Allahabad48Agra46Patna42Cuttack34Jodhpur32Ranchi27SC26Dehradun17Jabalpur11Orissa8Rajasthan8Kerala6Varanasi6Gauhati3Himachal Pradesh1Panaji1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Uttarakhand1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)112Addition to Income76Section 14754Section 153A48Section 6842Section 153C36Section 13229Section 14829Section 14A28Disallowance

DCIT CC-7(2) , MUMBAIA vs. M/S. DADASHREE REMEDIES PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2184/MUM/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2009-10
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 153ASection 68

68 is not based upon any seized/incriminating material at all. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Harjeev Aggarwal, 241 Taxman 199(Delhi) have held that statements recorded under Section 132(4

DCIT CC -7(2) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. DEWAL ENGINEERING PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 2,703 · Page 1 of 136

...
27
Reopening of Assessment23
Search & Seizure23
ITA 2268/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: Disposed
ITAT Mumbai
14 Nov 2022
AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Amarjit Singh ()

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)Section 68

68 is not based upon any seized/incriminating material at all. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Harjeev Aggarwal, 241 Taxman 199 (Delhi) have held that statements recorded under Section 132(4

M/S. INDEX LOGISTICS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 1 (2), MUMBAI

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 3361/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

4 Index Logistics Pvt Ltd & Ismail Muhammed Khan. dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant and confirming the addition of ₹2,76,85,351 made by the AO under section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits, because the addition has been confirmed based on incorrect assumptions and relying upon the statements of persons

M/S. INDEX LOGISTICS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 1 (2), MUMBAI

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 3362/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

4 Index Logistics Pvt Ltd & Ismail Muhammed Khan. dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant and confirming the addition of ₹2,76,85,351 made by the AO under section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits, because the addition has been confirmed based on incorrect assumptions and relying upon the statements of persons

MR ISMAIL MUHAMMAD KHAN,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 4288/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

4 Index Logistics Pvt Ltd & Ismail Muhammed Khan. dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant and confirming the addition of ₹2,76,85,351 made by the AO under section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits, because the addition has been confirmed based on incorrect assumptions and relying upon the statements of persons

M/S. INDEX LOGISTICS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 1 (2), MUMBAI

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 3347/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

4 Index Logistics Pvt Ltd & Ismail Muhammed Khan. dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant and confirming the addition of ₹2,76,85,351 made by the AO under section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits, because the addition has been confirmed based on incorrect assumptions and relying upon the statements of persons

ISMAIL MUHAMMAD KHAN,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 4273/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

4 Index Logistics Pvt Ltd & Ismail Muhammed Khan. dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant and confirming the addition of ₹2,76,85,351 made by the AO under section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits, because the addition has been confirmed based on incorrect assumptions and relying upon the statements of persons

M/S. INDEX LOGISTICS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 1 (2), MUMBAI

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 3360/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

4 Index Logistics Pvt Ltd & Ismail Muhammed Khan. dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant and confirming the addition of ₹2,76,85,351 made by the AO under section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits, because the addition has been confirmed based on incorrect assumptions and relying upon the statements of persons

M/S. INDEX LOGISTICS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 1 (2), MUMBAI

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 3346/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

4 Index Logistics Pvt Ltd & Ismail Muhammed Khan. dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant and confirming the addition of ₹2,76,85,351 made by the AO under section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits, because the addition has been confirmed based on incorrect assumptions and relying upon the statements of persons

MR ISMAIL MUHAMMAD KHAN ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISATNT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 4286/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

4 Index Logistics Pvt Ltd & Ismail Muhammed Khan. dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant and confirming the addition of ₹2,76,85,351 made by the AO under section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits, because the addition has been confirmed based on incorrect assumptions and relying upon the statements of persons

ISMAIL MUHAMMAD KHAN,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (2),, MUMBAI

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 4272/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

4 Index Logistics Pvt Ltd & Ismail Muhammed Khan. dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant and confirming the addition of ₹2,76,85,351 made by the AO under section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits, because the addition has been confirmed based on incorrect assumptions and relying upon the statements of persons

MR ISMAIL MUHAMMAD KHAN ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 4289/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

4 Index Logistics Pvt Ltd & Ismail Muhammed Khan. dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant and confirming the addition of ₹2,76,85,351 made by the AO under section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits, because the addition has been confirmed based on incorrect assumptions and relying upon the statements of persons

ITO-15(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S PRAVIR POLYMERS PVT LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 2595/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer-15(2)(4), M/S Pravir Polymers Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 360, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. 601/602, Delta, Central Avenue, Road, Marine Lines, Vs. Technology Street, Hiranandani Mumbai-400020. Garden Powai, Mumbai-400076. Pan No. Aaacp 4621 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivram, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. C.T. Mathews, DR
Section 114Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153C

Section 132(4) of the Act. The Tribunal has committed an error in ignoring the retraction made by the assessee." 6. We have gone through the order passed by the Tribunal and we do not find any infirmity in the said order. Learned advocate for the revenue is not M/s Pravir Polymers Pvt. Ltd. 22 ITA No. 2595/M/2019

DEEPAK KAKUBHAI MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6511/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 1Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 30Section 56

132(4) vide his letter addressed to the investigation Unit on 14/10/2017. The charts of the additions made are given below: Para 5.33 for alleged cash loan given in the assessment orders 5.33 In the light of the above discussion, the cash loans given by the assessee to Shri Nilesh Bharani are assessed as undisclosed investment in loans amounting

DEEPAK KAKUBHAI MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6508/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 1Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 30Section 56

132(4) vide his letter addressed to the investigation Unit on 14/10/2017. The charts of the additions made are given below: Para 5.33 for alleged cash loan given in the assessment orders 5.33 In the light of the above discussion, the cash loans given by the assessee to Shri Nilesh Bharani are assessed as undisclosed investment in loans amounting

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. G NINE MODULAR PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3213/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

section 132(4) cannot be considered as incriminating material found in the course of considered as incriminating material found in the course of considered as incriminating material found in the course of search search search as as as these these these are are are recorded recorded recorded to to to elicit elicit elicit more more more information/explanation

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. G NINE MODULAR PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3214/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

section 132(4) cannot be considered as incriminating material found in the course of considered as incriminating material found in the course of considered as incriminating material found in the course of search search search as as as these these these are are are recorded recorded recorded to to to elicit elicit elicit more more more information/explanation

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. G NINE MODULAR PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3212/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

section 132(4) cannot be considered as incriminating material found in the course of considered as incriminating material found in the course of considered as incriminating material found in the course of search search search as as as these these these are are are recorded recorded recorded to to to elicit elicit elicit more more more information/explanation

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 3(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. AVAADA VENTURES PVT. LTD , MUMBAI

ITA 2749/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

sections": [ "153A", "132", "132(4)", "68", "69C", "14A", "115JB(2)", "143(3)", "139(1)", "147", "148" ], "issues": "Whether the material

ARVIND KHETARAM PUROHIT ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4747/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Bharat Kumar
Section 132Section 153C

132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 conducted on 17.03.2021 in the case of M/s tax Act, 1961 conducted on 17.03.2021 in the case of M/s tax Act, 1961 conducted on 17.03.2021 in the case of M/s Rubberwala Housing and Infrastructure Ltd. (RHIL), certain digital Rubberwala Housing and Infrastructure Ltd. (RHIL), certain digital Rubberwala Housing and Infrastructure Ltd. (RHIL), certain