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.

1 result for “section 68”+ Section 234clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi725Karnataka524Mumbai426Bangalore245Surat165Ahmedabad133Jaipur129Kolkata104Chennai83Cochin77Chandigarh63Hyderabad52Pune39Indore36Lucknow24Raipur23Cuttack19Patna19Nagpur18Rajkot18Calcutta17Guwahati14Ranchi11Visakhapatnam7Dehradun7Telangana7Amritsar6SC5Allahabad5Varanasi4Agra4Jodhpur3Rajasthan3Panaji1Andhra Pradesh1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)2Section 69A2Section 115B2

SHASHIKALA BHIMACHARYA MALAGI,GOKAK, KARNATAKA vs. ITO, WARD-1, GOKAK, GOKAK, KARNATKA

The appeal is partly allowed in aforestated terms

ITA 180/PAN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji09 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 180/Pan/2023 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shashikala Bhimacharya Malagi 0, Soubhagya, Kalyan Housing Colony, Gokak, Belgaum-591307 Pan : Bdypm3708B . . . . . . .Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gokak. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Himanshu Gandhi [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Narendra Reddy [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 08/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/04/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Of The Assessee Impugns Din & Order No. 1055706480(1) Dt. 04/09/2023 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 20/12/2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Anent To Assessment Year 2017-18 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr Himanshu Gandhi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Narendra Reddy [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250
Section 69A

234 ITR 571 (Bom)]. Since neither party proved their version of contention which could pass test of reasonability for acceptance, therefore to balance the rival concern; we are of considered view that neither the explanation of appellant could be disbelieved in its entirety nor of the respondent believe that nothing could left with the appellant out of such pattern cash