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.

15 results for “section 68”+ Section 144Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai356Delhi298Ahmedabad160Kolkata118Hyderabad104Pune85Bangalore75Jaipur75Rajkot72Chennai66Chandigarh61Indore49Raipur42Visakhapatnam32Surat26Lucknow22Cochin19Agra17Nagpur15Guwahati13Amritsar9Cuttack7Dehradun7Patna6Ranchi4Jodhpur3Jabalpur3Allahabad2SC1Karnataka1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 14730Section 26330Section 14826Section 6814Addition to Income12Cash Deposit8Section 143(3)7Section 142(1)6Section 2505Section 143(1)

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

144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, 2. The assessee has raised following grounds:– “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

4
Reopening of Assessment4
Natural Justice4

NIRMALKUMAR AGRAWAL HUF,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BHANDARA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Loya a/wFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263

144B of the Act was passed on 24/03/2023, assessing total income at ` 4,28,820, stating that this was the returned income and income computed under section 143(1)(a) of the Act. This fact is incorrect, as the income returned was ` 2,60,860, and the same income was computed under section

LATITUDE INFRAVENTURES,NAGPUR vs. PCIT,NAGPUR-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017–18

ITA 350/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(2)

144B dated 29.03.2022 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue and in setting aside the assessment order with a direction to the learned AO to conduct enquiry and examination. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances, the learned Pr.CIT erred in assuming jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act on issues which were never the subject

LATITUDE INFRAVENTURES,NAGPUR vs. PCIT,NAGPUR-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017–18

ITA 349/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(2)

144B dated 29.03.2022 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue and in setting aside the assessment order with a direction to the learned AO to conduct enquiry and examination. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances, the learned Pr.CIT erred in assuming jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act on issues which were never the subject

SULTAN SINGH,JAMMU AND KAHMIR vs. ITO WARD 3(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 329/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 68

144B on 16/09/2021, by making an addition of ` 11,05,000, treating the same as unexplained cash credit under section 68

AKASH ANAND PURI,NAGPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(2) NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms indicated above

ITA 432/NAG/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2024AY 2017-2018

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

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 46ASection 69A

144B of the Act and without going into the merits of the case, made addition ex–parte and taxed the assessee under section 115BBE at ` 1,53,31,940. The learned Counsel accordingly prayed that the addition made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the learned CIT(A) be deleted. 6. The learned Departmental Representative supported the order

SUSHILA BHAURAO DESHMUKH,AMRAVATI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 76/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: ShriK.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Salunke
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 54BSection 54E

144B in assessee‘s case for A.Y. 2017–18, order dated 27/03/2023; and xvi) Order u/s 155(15) in assessee‘s case for A.Y. 2017–18. 7. The learned Counsel for the assessee further placed reliance on the following case laws in support of his arguments:– i) CIT v/s Max India

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(3), NAGPUR vs. NARESH NARAYANDAS RAMRAKHYANI, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 632/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Naresh GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)(a)

68 of the Act of the appellant and passed assessment order u/s 144B r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 29.03.2023 determining the assessed total 55,48,430/-income at Rs.23,55,48,430/- 4.1 to 4.5 ………. 4.6 It is seen from claim of the appellant that he is dealing with the purchases and sale agricultural products in cash. However

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(3), NAGPUR vs. NARESH NARAYANDAS RAMRAKHYANI, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 633/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Naresh GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)(a)

68 of the Act of the appellant and passed assessment order u/s 144B r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 29.03.2023 determining the assessed total 55,48,430/-income at Rs.23,55,48,430/- 4.1 to 4.5 ………. 4.6 It is seen from claim of the appellant that he is dealing with the purchases and sale agricultural products in cash. However

PRASHANT ARVIND TAYADE,AMRAVATI vs. ITO WARD 5, AMRAVATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 467/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleprashant Arvind Tayade, Plot No.33, Parakashta Jalpurti Colony, Ymv Road ……………. Appellant Amravati 444604, Maharashtra. Pan–Agtpt6782D V/S Income Tax Officer Ward–5, Ito Building, ……………. Respondent Saturna, Amravati-444607, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.Bhushan Lathiya.A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri.Bhushan Lathiya.A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr. DR
Section 250Section 68

Section 250, to the extent it is against the Appellant, be quashed and relief sought be granted.” 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee has not filed the return of income u/sec 139(1) of the Act for the A.Y. 2017–18 . The Assessing Officer has received information that the assessee has deposited Rs.4

DREAMZ INFRASTRUCTURE ,AMRAVATI vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 48/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 144Section 234ASection 250Section 44ASection 68

68 by treating the amount received from various parties by bank account payee cheque as unexplained credits. The addition made is improper, unjust and deserves to be delete. 6. That the Learned C.I.T. (Appeals) erred in passing order u/s 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act by making variation in returned income which are Dreamz Ifrastructure Rallies Plots

JYOTI PRAKASH PATIL,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 667/NAG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri C.N. Chandak, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

144B of the Act for the Assessment Year 2013-14 (A.Y.) 2. Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1 That the learned Assessing Officer erred in reopening the case u/s 148 of Income Tax act, 1961 on assumption 2 ITA.No.667/NAG/2025 (Jyoti Prakash Patil) basis without drilling down to genuineness and detailed information of the in-question Transaction

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. VINODKUMAR RAJENDRALAL KOCHHAR, KAMPTEE

In the result, the appeal filed by the department is dismissed

ITA 386/NAG/2023[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jul 2024

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44A

68 of the Act. (v) The Reliance was placed on the following decisions to state that there had been no failure of part of the appellant in submitting the relevant evidences & facts during the original proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act, that the reopening of the case was not as per law as there was no reason

KANHAIYA KRUSHI KENDRA,YAVATMAL vs. ITO WARD -1 , YAVATMAL

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

ITA 427/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalekanhaiya Krushi Kendra Main Bazar Line, Fulsa Wangi Mahagaon Dist. ……………. Appellant Yavatmal-445001, Maharashtra. Pan – Aaofk4226A V/S Income Tax Officer Ward–1, ……………. Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, Yavatmal-445001, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shriabhishek Kumar, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. D.R.

For Appellant: ShriAbhishek Kumar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 234ASection 68

section 142(1) of the Act, the assessee has submitted computation of income, audited report, bank statement and produced cash book. Whereas, the Assessing Officer has observed that the assessee is not able to substantiate and explain the source of cash deposits made in the bank account during the demonetization period and made addition of cash credits u/sec 68

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, YAVATMAL, YAVATMAL vs. PIYUSH TUSHAR PARALIKAR, YAVATMAL

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

ITA 393/NAG/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Apr 2026

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Royito, Ward-1, Yavatmal Piyush Tushar Paralikar, Vs 9, Radha Raman Nagar, Wadgaon Road, Yavatmal, Maharashtra-445001 Pan : Asepp 6032 D Revenue Assessee Assessee By : Shri Krish Sharma, Ca Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2026 Order

For Appellant: Shri Krish Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250Section 68Section 69A

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) which is arising out of assessment order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 23.03.2023, for the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in admitting additional evidence furnished during