Search: section 68 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

116 results for “section 68”+ Section 69Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi740 Mumbai700 Jaipur349 Ahmedabad306 Bangalore223 Chennai209 Hyderabad164 Chandigarh147 Surat121 Pune116 Kolkata115 Indore103 Cochin91 Rajkot90 Lucknow56 Amritsar51 Nagpur48 Visakhapatnam40 Raipur36 Agra35 Patna28 Jodhpur28 Guwahati25 Ranchi19 Allahabad18 Cuttack16 Jabalpur10 Varanasi6 Panaji5 Dehradun5 SC3 Karnataka3 Rajasthan1 Kerala1 Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 6892 Section 69A85 Addition to Income82 Section 143(3)59 Section 14854 Section 271(1)(c)42 Section 14739 Section 26336 Section 69C35 Cash Deposit

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 to section 69A, when error of invoking section 68 by AO was 'Jurisdictional error' and the satisfaction

Showing 1–20 of 116 · Page 1 of 6

25

Survey u/s 133A20

Undisclosed Income18

SAITAWADEKAR JEWELLERS ,CHIPLUN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE 1, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 870/PUN/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.870/Pun/2022 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Saitawadekarjewellers, The Pr.Cit, Pune-1. 1825, B2 Padma Talkies Bldg, Vs Opp.Urban Bank Bazar Peth, Chiplun – 415605. Pan : - Appellant/Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod Shingte – Ar Revenue By Shri Sardar Singh Meena,Irs – Dr Date Of Hearing 10/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 03/05/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assesseeisdirected Against The Order Of Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pune-1Dated 22.11.2022Emanating From The Order Of The Assessing Officer Dated 27.11.2017Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16. The Assesseehas Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Pcit In His Order U/S 263, While Giving Effect To The Order Dtd.31.05.2022 Of The Honorable Itat, Erred In Making The Following Additions To The Income Determined Vide Assessment Order Saitawadekar Jewellers [A]

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)Section 69

68 or section 69 or section 69A or section 69B or section 69C or section

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

69A of the Act. Probably, an addition under section 68 of the Act could have been considered; but then

SHARAD SHAMRAO SAWANT ,SANGLI vs. ASSESTANT COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

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

ITA 2626/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Umeshkumar M. MaliFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

sections 68, 69, 69A to 69D read with section 115BBE is on the assessee. 13. To sum up, before

NILESH POPATLAL GADA,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(4) , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 1538/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 250Section 68

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D and reflected in the return

SOPAN BANDOBA CHAVAN,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(1), PUNE

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

ITA 869/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 68

sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D, provisions of section 115BBE were not attracted. 15. Similar view

M/S. L.B. KUNJIR,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the three appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 417/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 115BSection 133ASection 69ASection 69BSection 80I

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D, the income-tax payable

DCIT CIRCLE 7, BODHI TOWER SALISBURY PARK vs. L B KUNJIR, PUNE

In the result, the two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the three appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1046/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 115BSection 133ASection 69ASection 69BSection 80I

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D, the income-tax payable

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7, PUNE vs. LB KUNJIR, PUNE

In the result, the two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the three appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 240/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 115BSection 133ASection 69ASection 69BSection 80I

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D, the income-tax payable

DCIT, PUNE vs. L B KUNJIR, PUNE

In the result, the two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the three appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1088/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 115BSection 133ASection 69ASection 69BSection 80I

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D, the income-tax payable

M/S. L.B. KUNJIR,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the three appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 418/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 115BSection 133ASection 69ASection 69BSection 80I

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D, the income-tax payable

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

section 68, 68, 69, 69A to 69D of the Act. 4.4 The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case

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

section 68, 68, 69, 69A to 69D of the Act. 4.4 The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. SHRI. BALAJI RAMCHANDRA ANDE, LATUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 625/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A Shah And Shri Rohit S TapadiyaFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 115BSection 131Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 68Section 69ASection 69BSection 69C

sections 68, 69, 69A to 69D read with section 115BBE is on the assessee. 5.7. To sum up, before

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NASHIK, NASHIK vs. MADANLAL LALCHAND JAIN, NANDURBAR

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

ITA 1572/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2021-22 Acit, Central Circle-2, Madanlal Lalchand Jain Nashik Vibhare Building, Vs. Near City Police Station, Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.42/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2021-22 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2022-23 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-11-2025 O R D E R Per Bench:

For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69B

sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D, provisions of section 115BBE were not attracted. 15. Similar view

MADANLAL LALCHAND JAIN,NANDURBAR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, NASHIK

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

ITA 1404/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2021-22 Acit, Central Circle-2, Madanlal Lalchand Jain Nashik Vibhare Building, Vs. Near City Police Station, Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.42/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2021-22 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2022-23 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-11-2025 O R D E R Per Bench:

For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69B

sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D, provisions of section 115BBE were not attracted. 15. Similar view

MADANLAL LALCHAND JAIN,NANDURBAR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, NASHIK

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

ITA 1403/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2021-22 Acit, Central Circle-2, Madanlal Lalchand Jain Nashik Vibhare Building, Vs. Near City Police Station, Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.42/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2021-22 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2022-23 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-11-2025 O R D E R Per Bench:

For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69B

sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D, provisions of section 115BBE were not attracted. 15. Similar view

ASHOK HIRACHAND SHAH,PANVEL vs. ASSESSING OFFICER WARD 2, PANVEL

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

ITA 812/PUN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.812/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Ashok Hirachand Shah, Assessing Officer, Plot No. 4, Mangal Bunglow, Ward – 2, Panvel Road No. 5, Sector No. 19, Vs. New Panvel, Tal.-Panvel-410206 Pan : Acdps4800M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajinkya Shah Department By : Shri Rajesh Gawali Date Of Hearing : 09-12-2025 Date Of 17-12-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.01.2025 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)/Nfac”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2011-12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Denial Of Natural Justice & Proper Opportunity The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Without Considering That The Appellant Was Denied Proper Opportunity & Natural Justice During The Assessment Proceedings. The Assessing Officer Called For Information At The Far End Of The Assessment Proceedings On 19/11/2018 & Despite The Appellant'S Authorized Representative Submitting The Details On 19/12/2018, The Ao Failed To Discuss Or Consider The Same. The Matter Ought To Have Been Remanded Back For Fresh Adjudication To Allow Proper Analysis Of The Transactions. 2. Addition Without Specifying The Section The Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Addition Of Rs. 1,49,05,289/- Made By The Ao Without Specifying The Section Under Which The Addition Was Made. The Non-Mention Of The Specific Section Renders The Assessment Order Bad In Law, As It Violates The Principles Of Natural Justice & Transparency In Taxation. 3. Failure To Discharge Onus Under Section 69A

For Appellant: Shri Ajinkya ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali

Section 147Section 69A

Section 69A are amongst the deeming provisions of the Act from S. 68 to S. 69D. The jurisprudence of S. 68

ROASHAN VISHNU PATHARE, L/H OF VISHNU TUKARAM PATHARE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(4),, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 221/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.221/Pun/2018 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M.G.Jasnani

Section 143(3)Section 54FSection 68

68 which is not proper and the correct provision in this case to be invoked is Section 69A. The reason

SHRI PADMAKAR SOPAN KANDARFALE,,LATUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, LATUR

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

ITA 2389/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Mrs. Shabana Parveen

Section 144Section 148Section 69A

68 and not for the purposes of Section 69, Section 69A and Section 69B. This is for the reason