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.

32 results for “section 68”+ Section 56(2)(viii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,208Mumbai620Karnataka540Bangalore244Ahmedabad153Jaipur140Chandigarh107Chennai101Kolkata101Indore86Cochin81Hyderabad70Calcutta53Visakhapatnam45Guwahati35Cuttack33Surat33Pune32Raipur28Telangana25Lucknow25Nagpur23Rajkot20Ranchi17Jodhpur16Agra16SC13Patna7Rajasthan6Allahabad5Kerala5Dehradun4Amritsar4Varanasi4Orissa2Jabalpur1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 92C(3)24Addition to Income18Section 143(3)17Section 56(2)(viii)13Section 13212Section 144C(8)12Disallowance10Section 10A9Search & Seizure9Section 153A

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 621/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.621/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 वष"

For Appellant: Shri T.B. Vijaya Reddy and Shri Mukesh Jha, CIT-DRsFor Respondent: Shri R.S. Abhyankar
Section 10(21)Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 2(24)(iia)Section 35(1)(ii)

viii) by the Taxation Laws Amendment Act, 2006 providing for taxation of gifts in cash or kind subjected to fulfilment of certain conditions specified in these amended provisions. In other words, many gifts-capital receipts are now taxable as income of the assessee after the amendments to section 56 of the Act. These aspects were not considered

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2

8
Section 143(2)8
Deduction8

HARISHCHANDRA NIVRUTI BARURE,,LATUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3,, LATUR

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

ITA 1725/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1724/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: None (written submissions)For Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 145ASection 148Section 23Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

section 56(2)(viii) of the Act, the aim, scope and object of the income chargeable to tax under the head “income from other sources” is clearly mentioned. The words are clear and unambiguous and if there is nothing in the Act detracting from the width of the said terms, it is clear that, the interest received on enhanced

RAMCHANDRA NIVRUTI BARURE,,LATUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3,, LATUR

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

ITA 1724/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1724/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: None (written submissions)For Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 145ASection 148Section 23Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

section 56(2)(viii) of the Act, the aim, scope and object of the income chargeable to tax under the head “income from other sources” is clearly mentioned. The words are clear and unambiguous and if there is nothing in the Act detracting from the width of the said terms, it is clear that, the interest received on enhanced

SANJAY NIVRUTI BARURE,,LATUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3,, LATUR

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

ITA 1726/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1724/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: None (written submissions)For Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 145ASection 148Section 23Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

section 56(2)(viii) of the Act, the aim, scope and object of the income chargeable to tax under the head “income from other sources” is clearly mentioned. The words are clear and unambiguous and if there is nothing in the Act detracting from the width of the said terms, it is clear that, the interest received on enhanced

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE -5, PUNE vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA PVT LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 323/PUN/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Sept 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker
Section 10ASection 14ASection 35Section 35(1)

viii) As regards, the disallowance of donation of Rs.5,50,000/- u/s 37(1), the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance of donation of Rs.5,50,000/- made to Sakal Social Foundation. (ix) With regard to claim for allowance of depreciation on windmill of Rs.56,11,914/-, the ld. CIT(A) held that civil construction and electrical work were undertaken

JYOTI JAYANTRAO INDURKAR,,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, LATUR

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

ITA 291/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. N. PuranikFor Respondent: Shri Jogesh Kamath
Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 234BSection 28Section 56Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

68,423/- and the same is tabulated at page 4 of the assessment order. However, in the computation of income, the assessee had not offered the interest of Rs.70,37,907/- for taxation under section 56(2)(viii

NASHIK DISTRICT PRIMARY TEACHERS CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 1(1), NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2070/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: ShriSanket JoshiFor Respondent: ShriRamnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

viii) Provisions relating to exemption and deduction need to be strictly construed and no liberal interpretation on intendment can be inferred in such provisions. An interest income not allowed as deduction u/s 80P(2)(a) cannot be allowed u/s 80P(2)(d) just because the investments have been shifted from a scheduled bank to a co-operative bank. When done

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 Pune09 Sept 2024AY 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

56,225/- 27,41,121/- 3.1 Further, on perusal of assessment records, it is found that there is substantial variation between consideration received or accrued and value adopted or assessed or assessable. The same difference is corroborated by the Index-II submitted with respect to the concerned sales. However, during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee had relied

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD., AURANGABAD. vs. TAPADIYA CONSTRUCTION LTD, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1375/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh B. Budruk, Addl.CIT
Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

viii) Without prejudice, the levy of penalty u/s 271D is discretionary. The customers insisted upon accepting cash payment towards providing of the additional amenities. In terms of the provisions of section 273B, the Assessee had reasonable cause for accepting the cash from its customers. 8.2 Pertinently, the A.O. has not disputed any of the above basic facts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. DAIMLER CHRYSLER INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1325/PUN/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2018AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1381/Pun/2003 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 1998-09 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Pramod AchuthanFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 15ASection 35A

section 35AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Disallowing expenditure of Rs.9,79,25,959/- in respect of write off CWIP due to discontinuation of MB car model series W 124 3. Disallowance Rs.25,600/- paid towards membership fee of Poona Golf Club & Hyatt Regency New Delhi, paid for Managing Director & other executives as expenditure

DAIMLER CHRYSLER INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1381/PUN/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2018AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1381/Pun/2003 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 1998-09 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Pramod AchuthanFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 15ASection 35A

section 35AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Disallowing expenditure of Rs.9,79,25,959/- in respect of write off CWIP due to discontinuation of MB car model series W 124 3. Disallowance Rs.25,600/- paid towards membership fee of Poona Golf Club & Hyatt Regency New Delhi, paid for Managing Director & other executives as expenditure

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AURANGABAD vs. VISTA NIRMAN PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 1340/PUN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

2. Dr. Amin’s Pathology Laboratory vs. P.N. Prasad, Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (2001) 252 ITR 673 (Bom) 3. ACIT v. M.P. Laghu Udyog Nigam Ltd. (2017) 83 taxmann.com 160 (Indore-Trib) 4. ITO v. TechSpan India (P.) Ltd. (2018) 92 taxmann.com 361 (SC) 5. Chetan Sabharwal vs. ACIT (2019) 110 taxmann.com 57 (Delhi) 16 CO No.21/PUN/2024 6. Subhodh

MERCEDES - BENZ INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,

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

ITA 1865/PUN/2013[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2019AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ Ita No. 1865/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 1999-2000 Mercedes Benz India Private Limited. ( Formerly Known As Daimler Chrysler India Private Limited) E-3, Midc Chakan, Phase-Iii, Chakan Industrial Area, Kuruli & Nighoje, Tal : Khed, Pune-410 501. Pan : Aabcm 1789L .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-9, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad
Section 35A

56 & 570f the Paper Book): "(a) a lump sum consideration of OM 56.6 million Deutsche Mark net of taxes 4 A.Y.1999-2000 Payable in four installments as follows: (i) OM 18.8 million one month after effectiveness of this agreement (ii) OM 18.8 million upon handing over of technical product documentation as per Article 3, however, not earlier than April

SPRINGER NATURE TECHNOLOGY AND PUBLISHING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

The appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed for\nStatistical Purpose

ITA 418/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Feb 2025AY 2017-18
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 250

56 of the Act.\"\n(emphasis supplied)\n2. 16. Similar principle has been upheld in following judicial rulings\namongst others that interest income on short term temporary\ndeposits from surplus funds is eligible for deduction under section\n10AA/10A/10B of the Act\nL Camiceria Apparels India (P) Ltd. vs ACIT ITA No. 1972 & 1973\nof 2008 (Madras)\nPCIT

BANK OF MAHARASHRA,PUNE vs. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 682/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Ananthan and Mrs. Lalitha RameswaranFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40A(7)

56,31,309/- under the normal provisions and determined the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act at Rs.6911,69,43,041/-. 4. Subsequently, the Ld. PCIT examined the records and observed that the said book profit under the provisions of section 115JB was rectified by the Assessing Officer to Rs.2404,02,51,679/- vide order dated 08.06.2021 under

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2),, PUNE vs. M/S SINHGAD TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY (TRUST), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1654/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl. It(Ss)A No./ Name Of Appellant Name Of Respondent Asst. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan A. KariaFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar
Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 153A

viii) There are numerous incidents wherein Sh.M.N.Navale has received recommendation letters from MLA, MP, ministers and eminent personalities seeking concession in donation to be paid. Many such letters were seized during search action which have been processed further by Sh.M.N.Navale by passing on due instruction to Sh.Bhosale.” XII. The ld. CIT-DR submits that Mr. M.N. Navale is key person

ACIT, CC-2(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. SARVOTTAM CONSTRUCTION, PUNE

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

ITA 2430/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sarvesh KandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 68

viii) Sanjay Kumar Jain - Rs 2,50,000/- [Already Conformed by LD CIT(A) ] Total - Rs.1,69,54,328/- which were not fully proved before Ld. CIT(A) and also the identity and creditworthiness of the creditors and genuineness of the transactions could not be proved before Ld. CIT(A). But Ld. CIT(A) committed error in treating the above

MEENAMANI GANGA BUILDER LLP,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), PUNE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 872/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Neelesh KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kharnar CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

2 and on facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions and scheme of the Act, it be held that the addition made by the Ld. AO and sustained by the First Appellate Authority is on a very high side. The same should be substantially reduced. The Appellant be granted just and proper relief in this respect

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1)PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 725/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.91 To 96/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Central Circle- Chhajed, 1(1), Pune. 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.97 & 98/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.725/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ratan SamalFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel
Section 132(4)Section 139(1)

56 taxmann.com 7 (Del) vii) CIT vs. Salek Chand Agarwal (2008) 300 ITR 426 (All) viii) CIT vs. Dinesh Jain (HUF) 352 ITR 629 (Del) 45 IT(SS)A Nos.91 to 96/PUN/2022 IT(SS)A Nos.97 & 98/PUN/2022 29. We find that the conclusions reached by the Assessing Officer are merely based on presumptions and assumptions without bringing any corroborative material

DEPUTY COMMSSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. IGATE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 342/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita. No.342/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

Section 115JSection 195(2)Section 201(1)Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

viii). Though a part of the income of the assessee qualified for deduction u/s.10A in the regular computation, but such deduction is not available in the computation of income u/s.115JB in view of the amended clause (f) 25 and IT(TP) A.No.10/Bang/2014 and clause (ii) of the Explanation 1 to section 115JB at the material time. Thus