Search: section 68 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

297 results for “section 68”+ Section 1clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi10,828 Mumbai9,739 Kolkata3,243 Bangalore2,600 Ahmedabad2,247 Chennai2,198 Jaipur1,567 Hyderabad1,425 Pune1,341 Surat963 Chandigarh904 Indore842 Karnataka811 Cochin642 Rajkot494 Raipur458 Visakhapatnam423 Lucknow318 Nagpur297 Amritsar272 Agra255 Cuttack244 Guwahati235 Telangana166 Patna161 Ranchi152 Jodhpur148 Calcutta145 SC132 Jabalpur120 Panaji109 Allahabad104 Dehradun102 Varanasi49 Rajasthan22 Orissa14 Kerala13 Punjab & Haryana7 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN5 Uttarakhand4 Gauhati3 Andhra Pradesh2 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI2 ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1 K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1 Tripura1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 HARJIT SINGH BEDI CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD1 ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)89 Section 153A75 Addition to Income57 Section 6844 Section 14838 Section 69C30 Section 234E24 Section 153C21 Disallowance20 Section 250

VIDHARBHA KONKAN GRAMIN BANK ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(5) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 7/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 22Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 80P

section 36(1)(viia) of the Act, ` 17,39,54,837, as addition on account of interest accrued but not due on Government and other securities, ` 2,68

Showing 1–20 of 297 · Page 1 of 15

...

19

VIDHARBHA KONKAN GRAMIN BANK ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(5) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 8/NAG/2019[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 22Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 80P

section 36(1)(viia) of the Act, ` 17,39,54,837, as addition on account of interest accrued but not due on Government and other securities, ` 2,68

AXYKNO CAPITAL SERVICES LTD,,NAGPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, NAGPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 178/NAG/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale (JCIT-DR)

Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148Section 68

68 of the Act. 1. Similarly in ACIT vs. Calvin Properties (ITA Nos. 6561, 6562 and 6564/Mum/ 2017) it has been held as under: “Ground No. 1 is raised against the addition made of Rs. 1,50,00,000 as unexplained cash credit under section

RAVINDRA MADANLAL KHANDELWAL,AKOLA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE , AKOLA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 375/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 144BSection 68

1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned First Appellate Authority was justified in endorsing the addition made under section 68

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCEL-1(2, NAGPUR vs. M/S. VIBRANT GLOBAL CAPITAL LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 229/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

section 68 of the Act in Para–5 to 9 as under:– “5. Question (B) and (C) require consideration together. On account of certain cash credits, the Assessing Officer had made addition of Rs.3,54,70,163/-. Out of this total amount, aggregate amount of cash credit in respect of 10 persons of Rs. 1

ITO, WARD- 1)1), NAGPUR vs. AXYKNO ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 47/NAG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani a/wFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

1,58,50,000, representing share capital received by the assessee during the year from various companies mentioned hereunder holding the same to be not genuine and consequently making the addition under section 68

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 108/NAG/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

68; the Assessing Officer has not made any addition on „undisclosed asset‟ which is sine qua non/pre-condition for assuming valid jurisdiction for making assessment under section 153C for „relevant AY‟ as per „fourth proviso‟ to section 153A(1

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 111/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

68; the Assessing Officer has not made any addition on „undisclosed asset‟ which is sine qua non/pre-condition for assuming valid jurisdiction for making assessment under section 153C for „relevant AY‟ as per „fourth proviso‟ to section 153A(1

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 110/NAG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

68; the Assessing Officer has not made any addition on „undisclosed asset‟ which is sine qua non/pre-condition for assuming valid jurisdiction for making assessment under section 153C for „relevant AY‟ as per „fourth proviso‟ to section 153A(1

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 109/NAG/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

68; the Assessing Officer has not made any addition on „undisclosed asset‟ which is sine qua non/pre-condition for assuming valid jurisdiction for making assessment under section 153C for „relevant AY‟ as per „fourth proviso‟ to section 153A(1

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 112/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

68; the Assessing Officer has not made any addition on „undisclosed asset‟ which is sine qua non/pre-condition for assuming valid jurisdiction for making assessment under section 153C for „relevant AY‟ as per „fourth proviso‟ to section 153A(1

VISHAL KISHORILAL JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 108/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2(40)Section 68Section 69

Section 68 but made the final addition u/s 69 without providing the opportunity to the appellant to respond, violating natural justice. 4. The Ld CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1

RAMKRUSHNA ZILBAJI THAKRE ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WRAD -4(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 207/NAG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Dr. Milind Bhusare, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 68

68 should be quashed. 5. Further, Ld AO submitted to our attention the gist of the Assessee’s submission, the same are extracted here below: GIST OF ASSESSEE'S SUBMISSION IN RESPECT OF PROVISIONS UNDER SECTION 680F THE ACT The above named assessee most respectfully submits as under: 1

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 26/NAG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

1,38,48,953/- 23.3.2021 3 49/NAG/2021 2013-14 Department 143(3) r.w.s. Abated 1.Sec.69C – 263 (153A Investment based Assessment) on DVO Report Amount Rs. 8,20,24,434/- 4 26/NAG/2020 2014-15 Department 143(3) r.w.s. Abated 1.Sec.69C – 153A Dt. Investment based 22.12.2017 on DVO Report Amount Rs. 6,38,21,488/- 2. Section 68

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER , NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 47/NAG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

1,38,48,953/- 23.3.2021 3 49/NAG/2021 2013-14 Department 143(3) r.w.s. Abated 1.Sec.69C – 263 (153A Investment based Assessment) on DVO Report Amount Rs. 8,20,24,434/- 4 26/NAG/2020 2014-15 Department 143(3) r.w.s. Abated 1.Sec.69C – 153A Dt. Investment based 22.12.2017 on DVO Report Amount Rs. 6,38,21,488/- 2. Section 68

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 140/NAG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

1,38,48,953/- 23.3.2021 3 49/NAG/2021 2013-14 Department 143(3) r.w.s. Abated 1.Sec.69C – 263 (153A Investment based Assessment) on DVO Report Amount Rs. 8,20,24,434/- 4 26/NAG/2020 2014-15 Department 143(3) r.w.s. Abated 1.Sec.69C – 153A Dt. Investment based 22.12.2017 on DVO Report Amount Rs. 6,38,21,488/- 2. Section 68

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 48/NAG/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

1,38,48,953/- 23.3.2021 3 49/NAG/2021 2013-14 Department 143(3) r.w.s. Abated 1.Sec.69C – 263 (153A Investment based Assessment) on DVO Report Amount Rs. 8,20,24,434/- 4 26/NAG/2020 2014-15 Department 143(3) r.w.s. Abated 1.Sec.69C – 153A Dt. Investment based 22.12.2017 on DVO Report Amount Rs. 6,38,21,488/- 2. Section 68

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA RADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 49/NAG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

1,38,48,953/- 23.3.2021 3 49/NAG/2021 2013-14 Department 143(3) r.w.s. Abated 1.Sec.69C – 263 (153A Investment based Assessment) on DVO Report Amount Rs. 8,20,24,434/- 4 26/NAG/2020 2014-15 Department 143(3) r.w.s. Abated 1.Sec.69C – 153A Dt. Investment based 22.12.2017 on DVO Report Amount Rs. 6,38,21,488/- 2. Section 68

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 27/NAG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

1,38,48,953/- 23.3.2021 3 49/NAG/2021 2013-14 Department 143(3) r.w.s. Abated 1.Sec.69C – 263 (153A Investment based Assessment) on DVO Report Amount Rs. 8,20,24,434/- 4 26/NAG/2020 2014-15 Department 143(3) r.w.s. Abated 1.Sec.69C – 153A Dt. Investment based 22.12.2017 on DVO Report Amount Rs. 6,38,21,488/- 2. Section 68

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3),, NAGPUR vs. M/S. 21ST CENTURY INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 207/NAG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri MahaveerAtal, CAFor Respondent: ShriPiyushKohle, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56

section 68 of the Act by the addition of proviso thereto took place with effect from April 1, 2013. Therefore