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.

12 results for “section 68”+ Section 22clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi6,006 Mumbai4,857 Bangalore1,681 Chennai1,216 Kolkata1,209 Ahmedabad1,091 Jaipur970 Hyderabad852 Karnataka706 Pune661 Surat515 Chandigarh507 Indore504 Cochin296 Raipur284 Visakhapatnam248 Rajkot235 Agra160 Cuttack157 Nagpur154 Amritsar138 Lucknow136 Telangana125 Guwahati111 Ranchi89 SC86 Calcutta78 Allahabad67 Jodhpur60 Patna58 Dehradun40 Panaji39 Jabalpur25 Varanasi18 Orissa12 Rajasthan11 Kerala10 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN4 Uttarakhand3 Gauhati2 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Himachal Pradesh1 K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1 ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1 ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 Andhra Pradesh1 Tripura1

Key Topics

Section 2(22)(e)4 Section 683 Addition to Income3 Section 132(4)2 Section 172 Search & Seizure2

M/S.BHASKAR TRADERS vs. ASST.COMMKNR.OF INCOME TAX,BERHAMPUR

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/174/2018HC Orissa30 Mar 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 68

22)(e) and Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) by the lower appellate authority, was erroneous

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1,BHUBANESWAR vs. KUNTALA MOHAPATRA

ITA/10/2024HC Orissa15 Apr 2024

Bench: DR. JUSTICE B.R.SARANGI,MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY

Section 132(4)

Section 68

68 of the Act at the hands of the assessee company is the statement recorded from one, Mr. Praveen Kumar Shastri, stated to be the director of Kandhari group of companies. On a perusal of the observations made by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order, it can be seen that in the statement recorded, 3 Act This

PRINCIPAL COMNR. OF INCOME TAX, SAMBALPUR RANGE vs. M/S. TATA SPONGE IRON LTD.

ITA/96/2022HC Orissa17 Aug 2023

Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Section 18 and explained its significance in the following words: ―22. The significance of Section 18 of the Act can be understood in the light of the above provisions. Section 18 provides for provisional assessment of duty in cases specified in sub-section (1) of the section. Clause (c) of sub-section (1) deals

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 vs. M/S.JAGANNATH CHAUDHURY

The appeal is disposed of as indicated above

ITA/1/2018HC Orissa18 Dec 2019

Bench: MR. JUSTICE K. S. JHAVERI (CJ),MR. JUSTICE K.R.MOHAPATRA

For Appellant: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXFor Respondent: M/S. SAHYADRI CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD

68 OF 2017 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 340/COCH/2016 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH APPELLANT: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOTTAYAM. BY ADV SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX, RESPONDENT: M/S. SAHYADRI CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD 1ST FLOOR, AMAL JYOTHI BUILDING, CATHEDRAL ROAD, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM - 686 507. BY ADVS. SRI.A.KUMAR SMT.G.MINI OTHER PRESENT: ADV NAVNEETH N NATH THIS INCOME

BARUNEI ROLLER FLOUR MILL (P) LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 1

In the result, the award of the maximum uniform rate for the

ITA/1/2022HC Orissa03 Nov 2023

Bench: DR. JUSTICE B.R.SARANGI (ACJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

22. Smti. Merilinda Kharbujon :::Cross Objector/Respondent No.29/ Claimant No. 30 23. Smti. Esther Syiem :::Cross Objector/Respondent No.30/ Claimant No. 31 24. Smti. Skerina Kharkongor :::Cross Objector/Respondent No. 31/ (deceased) Substituted by her Claimant No. 33 daughter Smti. Trasibon Kharkongor 25. Smti. Evangeline Sutnga :::Cross Objector/Respondent No.33/ Claimant No. 35 26. Smti. Stied Dkhar :::Cross Objector/Respondent No.35/ Claimant

M/S.SHEETAL REAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, the appeal fails and the substantial questions of law

ITA/83/2010HC Orissa08 Feb 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 372A

68 ITR 486 (SC) 152018 9 SCC Page 1 ITA/83/2010 REPORTABLE Page 22 of 60 9. Mr. J.P. Khaitan, learned senior advocate appearing for the respondent assessee submitted that the only question involved in the appeal is as to whether the tribunal was correct in holding the profit of Rs. 4,32,09,144/- on the sale of shares

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. INDRANI PATNAIK

ITA/4/2021HC Orissa21 Nov 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,MR. JUSTICE M.S.SAHOO

Section 120BSection 13(1)(d)Section 13(2)Section 17Section 26Section 42

22 of 31 undertake the measures specified under clauses (a) to (f) of the sub- section. The procedural framework for conducting such searches is laid down in Rule 3 of the PMLA (Search and Seizure or Freezing) Rules, 2005, which prescribes not only the detailed procedure to be followed but also the specific Form in which authorization must

BISWAJIT BEHERA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), BBSR

ITA/17/2024HC Orissa08 Oct 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

68 of the Act in the hands of ultimate company and separate addition in the hands of investor would lead to double taxation. V. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT is correct in holding non-application of mind on the part of Addl. CIT without calling the details of assessments

NEELACHAL I.NIGAM L. vs. ASST.COMNR.OF I.TAX

ITA/8/2005HC Orissa17 Nov 2021

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

Section 143(1)(a)

22 (1852) 3 HLC 759 : 10 ER 301 39 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters been emphasised in cases where the allegation of bias was far- fetched. Other judges have employed a 'reasonable suspicion' test, emphasising that justice must be seen to be done, and that no person should adjudicate in any way if it might reasonably be thought

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 vs. M/S. M.M. ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS

ITA/72/2022HC Orissa08 Jan 2026

Bench: MR. JUSTICE HARISH TANDON (CJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

For Respondent: Mr. Chetan Sharma, Additional Solicitor General alongwith Mr

Section 132(4)Section 3(1)Section 482

Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure vide Order dated 20.12.2021 passed by the Learned CMM. ii) On 21.12.2021 the Detenus made a representation to the Detaining Authority, submitting that a large number of documents furnished to them were illegible and many other documents that had been relied upon and referred to were not furnished, communicated and/or

COMNR.,OF INCOME TAX vs. FALCON REAL ESTATE

ITA/5/2012HC Orissa10 Feb 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

22 of 171 Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Mrinalini Sen, Standing Counsel with Ms. Latika Malhotra, Mr. Govind Kumar, Mr. Apurv Kumar, Ms. Anamika, Advocates for DDA. + LA.APP. 631/2008 DINESH KUMAR & ORS. .....Appellants Through: Mr. Bhagwat Pd. Gupta, Mr. Rajesh Gupta and Mr. Ganga Ram Upadhyay, Advocates. Mr. Amit Dhalla and Mr. Sohan Singh Rawat, Advocates. versus

COMNR.OF INCOME TAX vs. ORISSA MINING CORP.

ITA/40/2007HC Orissa07 Feb 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

22 of 171 Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Mrinalini Sen, Standing Counsel with Ms. Latika Malhotra, Mr. Govind Kumar, Mr. Apurv Kumar, Ms. Anamika, Advocates for DDA. + LA.APP. 631/2008 DINESH KUMAR & ORS. .....Appellants Through: Mr. Bhagwat Pd. Gupta, Mr. Rajesh Gupta and Mr. Ganga Ram Upadhyay, Advocates. Mr. Amit Dhalla and Mr. Sohan Singh Rawat, Advocates. versus