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.

3 results for “section 68”+ Section 145(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,118Mumbai1,097Karnataka495Jaipur364Ahmedabad317Kolkata299Bangalore235Chennai194Chandigarh180Cochin129Agra126Surat120Indore107Hyderabad100Pune88Raipur75Rajkot74Lucknow56Calcutta54Amritsar53Visakhapatnam47Nagpur45Allahabad44Cuttack42Telangana40Ranchi37Jodhpur20Dehradun18Patna16SC16Guwahati15Varanasi7Rajasthan5Jabalpur4Panaji3Orissa3Kerala2Punjab & Haryana1Gauhati1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 683Addition to Income3Section 143(1)2Section 143(2)2Section 14A2Capital Gains2Short Term Capital Gains2Business Income2Disallowance2

SOCIEADADE DE FOMENTO INDL. PVT. LTD.,MARGAO vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MARGAO RANGE, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 105/PAN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Nishant Thakkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the said loss claimed in respect of sale proceeds which were already received by the assessee and the assessee was not under obligation to keep sale proceeds under EEFC account? Once income is received, it is capital and any loss on account

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI vs. M/S SOCIADADE DE FOMENTO INDUSTRIAL P. LTD, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 116/PAN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Nishant Thakkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the said loss claimed in respect of sale proceeds which were already received by the assessee and the assessee was not under obligation to keep sale proceeds under EEFC account? Once income is received, it is capital and any loss on account

M/S ADITI SCANS PVT. LTD,BIJAPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, BIJAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 38/PAN/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Am M/S Aditi Scans Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit, Circle-1, Bijapur Shiva Kunja Chalukya Nagar (East) Solapur Road, Vijaypur, Vijaypur Pan No.Aagca 7255 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Prasanth G.S., Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Prabhat Jha, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/10/2021 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07/10/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A), Gulbarga, Dated 29.11.2017 For The Assessment Year 2009- 2010, On The Following Grounds :- The Order Of The Learned Cit(A) In So Far As It Is Against The 1. Appellant, Is Opposed To Law, Weight Of Evidence, Natural Justice, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case. The Appellant Denies Itself Liable To Be Assessed On A Total Loss 2. Of Rs. 15,76,829/- As Against The Lossof Rs.75,46,930/- Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. The Authorities Below Erred In Treating The Share Capital Of Rs. 3. 13,75,000/- As Unexplained Money Under Section 68 Of The Act Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. The Order Of The Authorities Below Is Bad In Law As The Amount 4. Of Rs. 13,75,000/- Cannot Be Brought To Tax In The Hands Of The Appellant As The Mandatory Conditions To Invoke Section 68 Of The Act Have Not Been Satisfied Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri Prasanth G.S., CAFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Jha, CITDR
Section 263Section 68

145(P&H). The onus to prove the genuineness of the trnasations lies with the appellant, which has not been discharged. Therefore, the cash credits under Sections 68 were treated asunexplained cash credits of the Income Tax Act, 1961 With regard to the increase in unsecured loans, the AR was requested to prove the identity of the person, thereir