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.

248 results for “section 68”+ Section 250clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,724Delhi2,155Kolkata1,080Bangalore660Jaipur592Ahmedabad587Chennai538Karnataka443Surat380Hyderabad301Chandigarh292Pune248Raipur200Indore191Rajkot175Amritsar168Cochin164Guwahati131Lucknow93Nagpur86Patna84Visakhapatnam81Allahabad66Panaji58Cuttack54Calcutta52Jodhpur51Agra47Telangana41Dehradun27Jabalpur26Ranchi23SC13Varanasi10Rajasthan7Orissa2Gauhati1Andhra Pradesh1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 6897Addition to Income78Section 25072Section 143(3)43Section 14743Section 14842Section 13235Section 143(2)27Natural Justice23Section 148A

KALPESH RATILAL GARDHARIA,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO WARD- 2(3), KOLHAPUR

In the result, the grounds on merit are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1850/PUN/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri S.N. PuranikFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 148Section 151Section 152Section 68Section 69Section 69A

68 of the Act and added the same to the total income of the assessee. 4. In the additional ground, the assessee contends that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act by the A.O had no jurisdiction and that the transfer of case from ITO Ward 2(1) Kolhapur to ITO Ward 2(3) Kolhapur without order

Showing 1–20 of 248 · Page 1 of 13

...
22
Disallowance18
Cash Deposit18

DILIP JUHARMAN JAIN ,RAIGAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1242/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.1242/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Dilip Juharmal Jain, The Acit, Bazarpeth, Mirchi Galli, At & V Circle Panvel. Post Pen Tal Pen Dist, S Raigad – 402107. Pan: Aappj5566P Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 10/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/01/2024

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

250 of the Act dated 07.11.2023 emanating from the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act dated 05.11.2018 . The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under : “1. The Hon. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.39,67,841/- made by the ld AO by holding the cash on hand

M/S. MAYFAIR BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS ,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2233/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2233/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Mayfair Builders & Vs Ito, Ward Developers, 2(3), Pune 1027, New Nana Peth, Pune-411001 Maharashtra Pan-Aacfm1312R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Vishwajit Shinde
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

section 68 of the Act. As the assessee revised the computation of income during the course of assessment proceedings declaring income of Rs. 12,55,539/- Ld. AO assessed the income at Rs. 37,05,789/- after making the addition u/s 68 of the Act at Rs. 24,50,250

SHRIJEET FINANCE P LTD,BEED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE, JALNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 439/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.439/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shrijeet Finance Private Limited, The Assistant Ambejogai Road, Parli, V Commissioner Of Maharashtra – 431515. S Income Tax, Circle, Pan: Aaqcs2652F Jalna. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas Bora – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 22/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 22/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 25.10.2021 Emanating From Assessment Order Dated 27.12.2019 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.6,66,151/- Shrijeet Finance Private Limited [A]

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36Section 68

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 25.10.2021 emanating from assessment order dated 27.12.2019 passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition

M/S MAULI MAHILA NAGARI SAHAKARI PATH SANSTHA LIMITED,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, LATUR, LATUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1351/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Bhuvnesh KankaniFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

250. Thus, the CITIA) is not justified in arbitrarily upholding the addition so made by Ld. AO. Accordingly, it be kindly held that the addition so upheld by Ld. CIT(A) is against the principle of Natural Justice. Accordingly, the order of CIT(A) upholding the additions made in Assessment Proceeding be kindly quashed and appellant be granted just

SMT ASHA BHAGWANRAO KADAM,PUNE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 607/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

68 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act as unexplained credit. The action of Learned Assessing Officer is contrary to his own presumption that cash receipts from Dattatray N. Kotgire are cash loan entries therefore he initiated independent proceedings for initiating penalty under section 271D and 271E for violating the provision of section 269SS and 269T

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD vs. SMT. ASHA BHAGWANRAO KADAM, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1895/PUN/2024[2018 19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

68 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act as unexplained credit. The action of Learned Assessing Officer is contrary to his own presumption that cash receipts from Dattatray N. Kotgire are cash loan entries therefore he initiated independent proceedings for initiating penalty under section 271D and 271E for violating the provision of section 269SS and 269T

SMT ASHA BHAGWANRAO KADAM,PUNE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 609/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

68 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act as unexplained credit. The action of Learned Assessing Officer is contrary to his own presumption that cash receipts from Dattatray N. Kotgire are cash loan entries therefore he initiated independent proceedings for initiating penalty under section 271D and 271E for violating the provision of section 269SS and 269T

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD vs. SMT. ASHA B. KADAM, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1896/PUN/2024[2018 19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

68 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act as unexplained credit. The action of Learned Assessing Officer is contrary to his own presumption that cash receipts from Dattatray N. Kotgire are cash loan entries therefore he initiated independent proceedings for initiating penalty under section 271D and 271E for violating the provision of section 269SS and 269T

SMT ASHA BHAGWANRAO KADAM,PUNE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 610/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

68 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act as unexplained credit. The action of Learned Assessing Officer is contrary to his own presumption that cash receipts from Dattatray N. Kotgire are cash loan entries therefore he initiated independent proceedings for initiating penalty under section 271D and 271E for violating the provision of section 269SS and 269T

SMT ASHA BHAGWANRAO KADAM,PUNE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 608/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

68 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act as unexplained credit. The action of Learned Assessing Officer is contrary to his own presumption that cash receipts from Dattatray N. Kotgire are cash loan entries therefore he initiated independent proceedings for initiating penalty under section 271D and 271E for violating the provision of section 269SS and 269T

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. SMT. ASHA BHAGWANRAO KADAM, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1894/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

68 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act as unexplained credit. The action of Learned Assessing Officer is contrary to his own presumption that cash receipts from Dattatray N. Kotgire are cash loan entries therefore he initiated independent proceedings for initiating penalty under section 271D and 271E for violating the provision of section 269SS and 269T

SMT ASHA BHAGWANRAO KADAM,PUNE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 611/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Vidya Ratna Kishore
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271DSection 271E

68 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act as unexplained credit. The action of Learned Assessing Officer is contrary to his own presumption that cash receipts from Dattatray N. Kotgire are cash loan entries therefore he initiated independent proceedings for initiating penalty under section 271D and 271E for violating the provision of section 269SS and 269T

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 5 PUNE, PUNE vs. DIPTI NARENDRA LULLA, PUNE

ITA 1065/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Dec 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(2)

sections": [ "143(2)", "142(1)", "133(6)", "68", "115BBE", "271AAC", "69", "270A", "131", "46A", "250(4)" ], "issues": "Whether the CIT(A) erred

ACIT CIRCLE-12, PUNE, PUNE vs. DHIRAJ BHAUSAHEB NIKAM, PUNE

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

ITA 1375/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2014-15 Acit, Circle – 12, Pune Dhiraj Bhausaheb Nikam Vs. 515/516, Purva Plaza, Sadashiv Peth, Pune – 411030 Pan: Aahpn5137C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia, Jcit (Through Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 10-02-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 11-02-2026 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia, JCIT
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(47)

250/- by invoking the provisions of section 68 of the Act on the ground that the assessee was unable

SHRI PARSHWANATH NAGARI SAHAKARI PATHSANSTH,SATARA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 757/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pawan ChakrapaniFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153ASection 281BSection 68Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

68 of the Act being arbitrary, illegal and bad-in-law be deleted. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A)-12, Pune erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant society filed against the Assessment Order passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer making addition of Rs.7

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK vs. YOGI COTEX PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2058/PUN/2025[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Oct 2025

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं / Ita No.2058/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Vs Yogi Cotex Private Acit, Central Circle-1, Nashik Limited, 4A, Vikas Centre, S V Road, Santacruz West, Mumbai-400054 Maharashtra Pan-Aaacy5355P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale-
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2018-19 which is arising out of assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s.153B of the Act dated 31.12.2019. 2. Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in deleting the addition

SHIVENDRA NAGOJIRAO PATANKAR,(HUF),,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2),, KOLHAPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee as well as the Cross

ITA 260/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.260/Pun/2018 िनधा!रण वष! / Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 234BSection 68Section 69

68 of the Act as invoked by the AO in the assessment order. In the impugned order, CIT(A) held that such changes in sections is permissible by the provisions of section 292B of the Act. In any case, this issue relates to the addition of Rs.81 lakhs. 12.1 So far as the confirmation of said addition

YASH CONSTRUCTION CO. ,NANDED vs. ACIT, CIRCLE , NANDED

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

ITA 676/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 115BSection 250Section 69C

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused. 2. The assessee’s former appeal in ITA No. 676/PUN/2024 for A.Y. 2017-18 raises the following substantive grounds : “1] The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,00,05,000/- u/s 69C r.w.s 115BBE

YASH CONSTRUCTION CO.,LATUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

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

ITA 677/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 115BSection 250Section 69C

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused. 2. The assessee’s former appeal in ITA No. 676/PUN/2024 for A.Y. 2017-18 raises the following substantive grounds : “1] The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,00,05,000/- u/s 69C r.w.s 115BBE