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.

3 results for “section 68”+ Section 12clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi8,389Mumbai7,116Bangalore2,201Kolkata1,863Chennai1,635Ahmedabad1,576Jaipur1,308Hyderabad1,150Pune940Surat764Karnataka754Chandigarh724Indore681Cochin437Raipur387Rajkot372Visakhapatnam344Nagpur236Amritsar212Lucknow210Cuttack202Agra189Guwahati173Telangana147Ranchi122Jodhpur107SC103Patna94Calcutta94Jabalpur91Allahabad90Dehradun59Panaji53Varanasi29Rajasthan18Orissa13Kerala12A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN4Uttarakhand3Punjab & Haryana3Gauhati3A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Tripura1Himachal Pradesh1ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Andhra Pradesh1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 260A2Addition to Income2

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, JALANDHAR vs. JOGINDER SINGH CHATHA

ITA/25/2023HC Punjab & Haryana07 Nov 2023

Bench: MR. JUSTICE GURMEET SINGH SANDHAWALIA,MS. JUSTICE HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN

Section 260A

12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Chandigarh Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:142470-DB ITA Nos.25 & 31 of 2023 (O&M) Page No.7 in the year 2006 and notice was issued in the year 2014. We are of the considered opinion that the explanation offered by the assessee regarding the amounts belonging

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS CHANDIGARH vs. M/S VISHAV MANAV RUHANI KENDRA

ITA/133/2021HC Punjab & Haryana20 Oct 2023

Bench: MR. JUSTICE GURMEET SINGH SANDHAWALIA,MS. JUSTICE HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN

Section 11(1)(d)Section 260A

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘1961 Act’) is directed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench ‘B’ passed in ITA No.899/Chd/2019 dated 21.05.2020 (Annexure A-3). 2. Counsel for the appellant has pressed the following substantial question of law:- “(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

RANJIT SINGH GHUMAN vs. C I T

ITA/216/2007HC Punjab & Haryana17 May 2024

Bench: The Revenue Authorities That A Sum Of ` 5,00,000/- Was Still Due To Be Paid & Varinder Singh 2024.05.21 13:43 I Attest To The Accuracy & Authencity Of This Order/Judgment

Section 158

Section 158 BC (c) on 26.02.2002 by the CIT, Jalandhar and while making other VARINDER SINGH 2024.05.21 13:43 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment ITA No. 216 of 2007 -3- additions, ` 5,00,000/- have been added as undisclosed investment made to acquire the rights of his sister-in-law in the family property