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.

39 results for “section 68”+ Section 234clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi725Karnataka524Mumbai426Bangalore245Surat165Ahmedabad133Jaipur129Kolkata104Chennai83Cochin77Chandigarh63Hyderabad52Pune39Indore36Lucknow24Raipur23Cuttack19Patna19Nagpur18Rajkot18Calcutta17Guwahati14Ranchi11Visakhapatnam7Dehradun7Telangana7Amritsar6SC5Allahabad5Varanasi4Agra4Jodhpur3Rajasthan3Panaji1Andhra Pradesh1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)26Addition to Income25Section 6817Section 10A14Section 153A12Section 133(6)12Section 80I12Disallowance12Section 132(4)11Section 234

GOPAL EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD,,JALGAON vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2),, JALGAON

ITA 1633/PUN/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita. No.1633/Pun/2017 Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath Murkunde
Section 143(3)

68 of the Income Tax Act. [4] On the facts and in the prevailing circumstances of the case as well as in law, the learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the facts of case and in confirming the addition of Rs.8,40,00,000/-, u/s.68 of the IT Act, for the following reasons: (a) Merely on doubt, assumption, presumption

M/S KIRAN SANRAN ASSOCIATES,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 791/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune

Showing 1–20 of 39 · Page 1 of 2

10
Search & Seizure10
Deduction10
09 Sept 2024
AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Naveen RanderFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263Section 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 43C

68 33,85,80,176 14 9,02,79,805 8 4,67,15,104 7. Referring to the above, he submitted that in the subsequent submissions the assessee relying on the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rahul Construction vs. DCIT reported in 38 DTR 19 has explained to the Assessing Officer that

KOLHAPUR TIMBER AND FURNITURE MART,KOLHAPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2697/PUN/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. N. PuranikFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 68

Sections like 69,69A, 69B for Sec.68 applied by Assessing Officer. Appellant prays to cancel the same. 4. CIT(A) is not just and fair in confirming applicability of special rate of Tax u/s 115BВЕ. 5. Appellant denies liability to Interest u/s 234, same may please be cancelled. 6. Appellant prays to cancel the levy of interest charged

LATE HARILAL MAVJIBHAI PATEL,KOLHAPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2698/PUN/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2698/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Puranik
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 234Section 250Section 68Section 69

68. Appellant prays to hold that Sec.68 has no application. Appellant prays to cancel the applicability of Sec. 115BBE accepting the same as Business Income to which Normal Tax rate will be applicable. 3 Late Harilal Mavjibhai Patel 2. CIT(A) has erred in not following the Jurisdictional Pune ITAT decision on the identical issue brought his Notice. Appellant prays

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. M/S PARTHA MULTITRADE INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 684/PUN/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.682 To 685/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. M/S. Partha Multitrade Aurangabad. India Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Swift Ventures Pvt. Ltd.), Flat No.1/5, A. S. Yadav Chawl Pada, Nr. Mahakali Mandir, Dahisar, Mumbai-400068. Pan : Aalcs3668L Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 30.06.2022 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.685/Pun/2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari
Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

section 68 of the Act. In the circumstances, the ld. CIT(A) had upheld the action of the Assessing Officer in bringing to tax the amount of money found to consideration of investments received from the said five companies. However, the ld. CIT(A) had fell in serious error in holding that the Assessing Officer made addition on protective

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. M/S PARTHA MULTITRADE INDIA PVT LTD (EARLIER KNOWN AS SWIFT VENTURES PVT LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 682/PUN/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.682 To 685/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. M/S. Partha Multitrade Aurangabad. India Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Swift Ventures Pvt. Ltd.), Flat No.1/5, A. S. Yadav Chawl Pada, Nr. Mahakali Mandir, Dahisar, Mumbai-400068. Pan : Aalcs3668L Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 30.06.2022 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.685/Pun/2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari
Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

section 68 of the Act. In the circumstances, the ld. CIT(A) had upheld the action of the Assessing Officer in bringing to tax the amount of money found to consideration of investments received from the said five companies. However, the ld. CIT(A) had fell in serious error in holding that the Assessing Officer made addition on protective

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. M/S PARTHA MULTRITRADE INDIA PVT LTD (EARLIER KNOWN AS SWIFT VENTURES PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 683/PUN/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.682 To 685/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. M/S. Partha Multitrade Aurangabad. India Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Swift Ventures Pvt. Ltd.), Flat No.1/5, A. S. Yadav Chawl Pada, Nr. Mahakali Mandir, Dahisar, Mumbai-400068. Pan : Aalcs3668L Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 30.06.2022 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.685/Pun/2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari
Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

section 68 of the Act. In the circumstances, the ld. CIT(A) had upheld the action of the Assessing Officer in bringing to tax the amount of money found to consideration of investments received from the said five companies. However, the ld. CIT(A) had fell in serious error in holding that the Assessing Officer made addition on protective

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, , AURANGABAD vs. M/S PARTHA MULTITRADE INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 685/PUN/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.682 To 685/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. M/S. Partha Multitrade Aurangabad. India Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Swift Ventures Pvt. Ltd.), Flat No.1/5, A. S. Yadav Chawl Pada, Nr. Mahakali Mandir, Dahisar, Mumbai-400068. Pan : Aalcs3668L Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 30.06.2022 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.685/Pun/2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari
Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

section 68 of the Act. In the circumstances, the ld. CIT(A) had upheld the action of the Assessing Officer in bringing to tax the amount of money found to consideration of investments received from the said five companies. However, the ld. CIT(A) had fell in serious error in holding that the Assessing Officer made addition on protective

DCIT, CIRCLE- 5, PUNE vs. SHRI AMEETSINGH A RAJPAL, PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 68/PUN/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jul 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri S.P. WalimbeFor Respondent: Shri Suhas P. Bora
Section 143(3)Section 68

234, 235, 323/2015-16/3 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in short “the Act”, respectively. Both parties heard. Case files perused. 2. It transpires at the very outset that the Revenue’s identical twin substantive grounds in all the three cases seek to revise section 68

DCIT, CIRCLE- 5, PUNE vs. SHRI AMEETSINGH A RAJPAL, PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 70/PUN/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jul 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri S.P. WalimbeFor Respondent: Shri Suhas P. Bora
Section 143(3)Section 68

234, 235, 323/2015-16/3 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in short “the Act”, respectively. Both parties heard. Case files perused. 2. It transpires at the very outset that the Revenue’s identical twin substantive grounds in all the three cases seek to revise section 68

DCIT, CIRCLE- 5, PUNE vs. SHRI AMEETSINGH A RAJPAL, PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 69/PUN/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jul 2022AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri S.P. WalimbeFor Respondent: Shri Suhas P. Bora
Section 143(3)Section 68

234, 235, 323/2015-16/3 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in short “the Act”, respectively. Both parties heard. Case files perused. 2. It transpires at the very outset that the Revenue’s identical twin substantive grounds in all the three cases seek to revise section 68

INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, JALGAON vs. PRAMOD BHAICHAND RAISONI,, JALGAON

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1398/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 194A(3)(iii)Section 40

234 ITR 104 (Mad.) holding that : “A cooperative society which undertakes the business of banking, such as, lending money to its members or accepting deposits or raising loans from financial and banking institutions and advancing the same to its members is definitely engaged in the business of banking.” He also referred to another decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court

INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, JALGAON vs. PRAMOD BHAICHAND RAISONI,, JALGAON

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1397/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 194A(3)(iii)Section 40

234 ITR 104 (Mad.) holding that : “A cooperative society which undertakes the business of banking, such as, lending money to its members or accepting deposits or raising loans from financial and banking institutions and advancing the same to its members is definitely engaged in the business of banking.” He also referred to another decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court

SAMEER SHRIKANT PISE,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE 12, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 1078/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri V. Balaji, CA (virtual)For Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva - Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)Section 154

68,870/- and as against the tax liability of Rs. 8,91,631/- claimed TDS of Rs. 19,02,270/-. In the income tax return in schedule-FA, the assessee has declared salary income received from the employer in UK. However, when the return was processed u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Act, the income earned in UK, which

ASHOK VIJAYKUMAR KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1494/PUN/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 127Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 292BSection 68

section 68 does not apply. e) No sum is credited or no proof is found by the Assessing Officer of payment of Rs. 10,00,000/- and made the addition only on the basis of document impounded which is nothing but a dumb document. 4) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing

ASHOK VIJAYKUMAR KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1493/PUN/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 127Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 292BSection 68

section 68 does not apply. e) No sum is credited or no proof is found by the Assessing Officer of payment of Rs. 10,00,000/- and made the addition only on the basis of document impounded which is nothing but a dumb document. 4) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing

ASHOK VIJAYKUMAR KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1492/PUN/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Apr 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 127Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 292BSection 68

section 68 does not apply. e) No sum is credited or no proof is found by the Assessing Officer of payment of Rs. 10,00,000/- and made the addition only on the basis of document impounded which is nothing but a dumb document. 4) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing

M/S. TATA TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1433/PUN/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1433/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S. Tata Technologies Limited, Plot No.25, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Hingewadi, Pune – 411057 …. Pan: Aaact3092N Vs. The Dy. Director Of Income Tax …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent (International Taxation)-Ii, Pune

For Appellant: S/Shri Dhanesh Bafna and Arpitha ChoudaryFor Respondent: S/Shri Vivek Aggarwal and Mukesh Jha
Section 115ASection 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 90(2)

234 CTR 153 (SC), wherein it has been held that the words “chargeable under the provisions of the Act’ used in section 195(1) of the Act clearly indicate that the payments made to Non-resident should partake the character of income chargeable to tax, in order to trigger withholding of tax. The assessee claimed that similar proposition

SHARP DESIGNERS AND ENGINEERS INDIA P. LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2263/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2263/Pun/2014 आयकरअपीलसं आयकरअपीलसं आयकरअपीलसं िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2010-11 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष"

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 14ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 80ASection 80I

234 (Amrtisar). Appellant's reliance on the decision of Yash Developers V. ITO - ITA No. 809/MUM/2011 was held as misplaced by observing that 4th proviso to section 139(1) was introduced from AY 2006-07 while the decision of Mumbai ITAT related to AY 1972-73. Various other issues were also involved in the appeal before the Ld.CIT

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. SHARP DESIGNER AND ENGINEERS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1262/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2263/Pun/2014 आयकरअपीलसं आयकरअपीलसं आयकरअपीलसं िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2010-11 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष"

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 14ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 80ASection 80I

234 (Amrtisar). Appellant's reliance on the decision of Yash Developers V. ITO - ITA No. 809/MUM/2011 was held as misplaced by observing that 4th proviso to section 139(1) was introduced from AY 2006-07 while the decision of Mumbai ITAT related to AY 1972-73. Various other issues were also involved in the appeal before the Ld.CIT