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.

10 results for “section 68”+ Section 80Eclear

Sorted by relevance

Ahmedabad20Bangalore11Mumbai10Delhi6Jaipur5Surat2Calcutta1Patna1Pune1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)19Addition to Income9Disallowance8Deduction7Section 36(1)(viii)5Section 56(2)(viib)3

HOUSING DEVP. FIN.CORPN. LTD. vs. THE ADIT CIR. 1(1),

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 552/MUM/2004[98-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2024
Section 144Section 36(1)(viii)

80E as also in section 80B(7)\nexcept with the difference that this clause refers to Sixth Schedule in place of Fifth\nSchedule. It is pertinent to mention that all the three provisions hereinabove are\nthe provisions granting relief to the assessees with a view to give incentive to\ncertain types of industries. The Legislature has in its wisdom

THE DY CIT CIR 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

ITA 337/MUM/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2000-2001
Section 143(3)

80E as also\nin section 80B(7) except with the difference that this clause refers to Sixth\nSchedule in place of Fifth Schedule. It is pertinent to mention that all\nthe three provisions hereinabove are the provisions granting relief\nto the assessees with a view to give incentive to certain types of\nindustries. The Legislature has in its wisdom

DCIT CIR 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPN. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

ITA 7532/MUM/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 1999-2000
Section 143(3)

80E as also\nin section 80B(7) except with the difference that this clause refers to Sixth\nSchedule in place of Fifth Schedule. It is pertinent to mention that all\nthe three provisions hereinabove are the provisions granting relief\nto the assessees with a view to give incentive to certain types of\nindustries. The Legislature has in its wisdom

M/S. HOUSING DEVELOP,MENT FINANCE CORPN. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 286/MUM/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2000-2001
For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)

80E as also\nin section 80B(7) except with the difference that this clause refers to Sixth\nSchedule in place of Fifth Schedule. It is pertinent to mention that all\nthe three provisions hereinabove are the provisions granting relief\nto the assessees with a view to give incentive to certain types of\nindustries. The Legislature has in its wisdom

THE DY CIT CIR 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPN LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

ITA 724/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2001-2002
Section 143(3)

80E as also\nin section 80B(7) except with the difference that this clause refers to Sixth\nSchedule in place of Fifth Schedule. It is pertinent to mention that all\nthe three provisions hereinabove are the provisions granting relief\nto the assessees with a view to give incentive to certain types of\nindustries. The Legislature has in its wisdom

M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORP. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR. 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7447/MUM/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 1999-2000
Section 143(3)

80E as also\nin section 80B(7) except with the difference that this clause refers to Sixth\nSchedule in place of Fifth Schedule. It is pertinent to mention that all\nthe three provisions hereinabove are the provisions granting relief\nto the assessees with a view to give incentive to certain types of\nindustries. The Legislature has in its wisdom

M/S. HOUSING DEVELOP,MENT FINANCE CORPN. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ADDL CIT RG-1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

ITA 287/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2001-2002
Section 143(3)

80E as also\nin section 80B(7) except with the difference that this clause refers to Sixth\nSchedule in place of Fifth Schedule. It is pertinent to mention that all\nthe three provisions hereinabove are the provisions granting relief\nto the assessees with a view to give incentive to certain types of\nindustries. The Legislature has in its wisdom

DY CIT. CIRCLE-1, THANE vs. M/S TRAVECOM GLOBAL P. LTD., BHAYANDER

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 59/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit – Circle 1 V. M/S. Travecom Global Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 22, B-Wing B/607, Krishnakunj 6Th Floor, Ashar I.T. Park Salasar Brij Bhoomi Wagle Industrial Estate Bhayander (W)-401101 Thane (W)-400604 Pan: Aaect8729Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Aarti Vissanji Department By : Shri B.K. Bagchi

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi
Section 143(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

68 are in the nature of anti-abuse measures aimed at preventing the mala fide transactions intended to avoid tax liability and to tackle the problem of black money and were never intended to be made applicable on genuine, bona fide and purely commercial transactions. To substantiate the same the assessee relies on the following board circulars and judicial precedents

MANISH KUMUDCHANDRA METHA ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-19(2)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 2410/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

80E, Napeansea Road, Grant Road, Mumbai – 400 006 Mumbai – 400 007 PAN: AADPM9184G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Krishna Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 15 . 11 . 2022 Date of Pronouncement : 22 . 11 . 2022 O R D E R Per : Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member: The appellant, Shri Manish Kumudchandra Mehta (hereinafter referred to as ‘the assessee

ASST CIT (LTU) 2, MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 1547/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 43B

sections, the same profits shall not be allowed as a deduction under any other provision of this Act for the same assessment year and that in any case the deduction shall not exceed the profits and gains of the eligible undertaking or unit or enterprise or business, as the case may be. Even if Section 10A/Section