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.

16 results for “section 68”+ Section 253(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai778Delhi705Karnataka456Ahmedabad156Bangalore135Jaipur129Chandigarh109Indore102Chennai100Kolkata79Surat53Lucknow52Pune51Hyderabad42Cochin41Rajkot36Allahabad31Amritsar28Guwahati25Patna19Calcutta17Nagpur16Agra14SC14Raipur13Jodhpur12Varanasi11Panaji10Visakhapatnam9Ranchi8Telangana6Rajasthan3Cuttack3Uttarakhand2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Orissa1Andhra Pradesh1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)19Section 153A11Section 1447Section 1486Section 143(2)4Section 142(1)4Section 271B4Section 684Addition to Income3Deduction

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

68 cannot be made of share premium money since such is a receipt on capital account and is not of revenue nature. Further, it is observed that the provisions of section 56(2) (viib) inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 had been made applicable from the assessment year 2013-14 and does not apply to the year relevant

2
Penalty2

CHANDRAKUMAR MADHUSUDANJI JAJODIA,THANE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRAVATI CIRCLE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 399/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68Section 69A

section 68 or 69A of I.T. Act 1961. Addition made by A.O. is unjustified. F) Observation of A.O. at para 40 & 41 is factually incorrect. During regular assessment proceedings loan transaction was verified and examined while accepting the same as genuine loan. Observations of A.O. thus are indicative of non-application of mind. G) In submission made before

UMESH SADASHIV THAKRE ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 242/NAG/2022[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2020-2021
Section 143(3)Section 153A

4 requirements\nthat are mandated therein, (i) the AO should submit the draft assessment\norder \"well in time”. Here it was submitted just 2 days prior to the deadline\nthereby putting the approving authority under great pressure and not giving\nhim sufficient time to apply his mind; (ii) the final approval must be in\nwriting; (iii) The fact that approval

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

ITA 254/NAG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 153A

4 requirements\nthat are mandated therein, (i) the AO should submit the draft assessment\norder \"well in time”. Here it was submitted just 2 days prior to the deadline\nthereby putting the approving authority under great pressure and not giving\nhim sufficient time to apply his mind; (ii) the final approval must be in\nwriting; (iii) The fact that approval

YRCE EDUCATE PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 244/NAG/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018

68, which is ignored by the Addl.CIT while granting such\nmechanical approval. He has not even cared that in the absence of required\nsatisfaction note“ for each year separately, entire assessment under section\n153C would be vitiated.\n60. In the present case before us, we noted that the Addl.CIT did not mention\nanything in the approval order passed under

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

ITA 256/NAG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

4 requirements\nthat are mandated therein, (i) the AO should submit the draft assessment\norder "well in time”. Here it was submitted just 2 days prior to the deadline\nthereby putting the approving authority under great pressure and not giving\nhim sufficient time to apply his mind; (ii) the final approval must be in\nwriting; (iii) The fact that approval

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. ATUL YAMSANWAR , NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 260/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

4 requirements\nthat are mandated therein, (i) the AO should submit the draft assessment\norder "well in time”. Here it was submitted just 2 days prior to the deadline\nthereby putting the approving authority under great pressure and not giving\nhim sufficient time to apply his mind; (ii) the final approval must be in\nwriting; (iii) The fact that approval

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. ATUL YAMSANWAR , NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 263/NAG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

4 requirements that are mandated therein,\n(i) the AO should submit the draft assessment order \"well in time”. Here it\nwas submitted just 2 days prior to the deadline thereby putting the\napproving authority under great pressure and not giving him sufficient time\nto apply his mind;\n(ii) the final approval must be in writing

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. ATUL YAMSANWAR , NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 259/NAG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

4 requirements\nthat are mandated therein, (i) the AO should submit the draft assessment\norder "well in time”. Here it was submitted just 2 days prior to the deadline\nthereby putting the approving authority under great pressure and not giving\nhim sufficient time to apply his mind; (ii) the final approval must be in\nwriting; (iii) The fact that approval

YRCE EDUCATE PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

ITA 245/NAG/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2018-2019

4 requirements\nthat are mandated therein, (i) the AO should submit the draft assessment\norder "well in time”. Here it was submitted just 2 days prior to the deadline\nthereby putting the approving authority under great pressure and not giving\nhim sufficient time to apply his mind; (ii) the final approval must be in\nwriting; (iii) The fact that approval

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 252/NAG/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2016-2017

68, which is ignored by the Addl.CIT while granting such\nmechanical approval. He has not even cared that in the absence of required\nsatisfaction note“ for each year separately, entire assessment under section\n153C would be vitiated.\n60. In the present case before us, we noted that the Addl.CIT did not mention\nanything in the approval order passed under

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 250/NAG/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2014-2015

68 and 69 of the PB which contains information\nobtained by Smt. Neetu Nayyar from Central Public Information Officer who\nis none other than the Id Addl.CIT, Central Range-S, New Delhi, under RTI\nAct, wherein, it reveals that the Id Addl.CIT had granted approval for 43\ncases on 30-12-18 itself. This fact is not in dispute before

MRS. BEANT KAUR JUNEJA,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), NAGPUR

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED

ITA 18/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 018/Nag/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Beantkaur Avtarsingh Juneja Hp Petrol Pump, Dosar Bhavan, C. A. Road, Nagpur-440002. Pan: Aflpj2956E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 24Section 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271BSection 273BSection 274(1)Section 44A

68,859/. 2.3 Aggrieved assessee carried the matter in appeal before first appellate authority u/s 246A(1)(a) of the Act. While dealing with assessee’s appeal the Ld. NFAC provided as much as six opportunities from January, 2021 to March, 2022, however, the assessee failed to effectively establish the reasonable cause beyond delayed filing of TAR to the satisfaction

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (2), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 177/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

4 of the Act and hence not at all chargeable under the Act. The receipt which is neither “Profit” nor “Income” and which does not have any element thereof embedded therein, cannot be the part of the profit as per the profit and loss account prepared in terms of Part II of Schedule VI to the Companies

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

4 of the Act and hence not at all chargeable under the Act. The receipt which is neither “Profit” nor “Income” and which does not have any element thereof embedded therein, cannot be the part of the profit as per the profit and loss account prepared in terms of Part II of Schedule VI to the Companies

SHAIKH MAHMOOD SHAIKH CHANDA,ACHALPUR vs. ITO WARD-4, AMRAVATI

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

ITA 541/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleshaikh Mahmood Shaikh Chanda, 4, Ward No.4, Achalpur, Pathrot -444808, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan – Alipc0613Q V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward–4, ……………. Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, Amravati-444601, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.D.P. Lohiya.A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri.D.P. Lohiya.A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 253Section 271ASection 69

4, ……………. Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, Amravati-444601, Maharashtra. Assessee by: Shri.D.P. Lohiya.A.R. Revenue by :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR Date of Hearing – 15/10/2025 Date of Order – 16/10/2025 O R D E R The assessee has filed the appeal against the order dated 24/06/2025, passed by the CIT(A)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi, under section 144 and u/sec