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.

6 results for “section 68”+ Section 4clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi10,855Mumbai9,649Kolkata3,216Bangalore2,590Ahmedabad2,229Chennai2,179Jaipur1,557Hyderabad1,441Pune1,331Surat950Chandigarh900Indore843Karnataka808Cochin640Rajkot495Raipur460Visakhapatnam421Lucknow318Nagpur298Amritsar272Agra256Cuttack243Guwahati234Telangana165Patna156Calcutta152Ranchi148Jodhpur148SC130Jabalpur119Panaji109Dehradun106Allahabad104Varanasi50Rajasthan22Orissa13Kerala13Punjab & Haryana6A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN5Uttarakhand4Gauhati3Andhra Pradesh2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI2ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Himachal Pradesh1Tripura1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1HARJIT SINGH BEDI CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD1ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1

Key Topics

Addition to Income4Section 41(1)2Section 682Section 54F2Section 260A2Exemption2

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

4. A perusal of the paper-book would go on to show that there were allegations that the assessee had deposited $2496835.89 equivalent to `11,13,83,849/- @ `44.61 per US$ in the said bank account during the financial year 2005-2006 and relevant to the assessment year 2006-2007. Similarly, there was another deposit of $226509.38 equivalent

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MS GOBIND DHAM RENEWABLE ENERGY PVT LTD

ITA/111/2024HC Punjab & Haryana04 Dec 2024

Bench: The Revenue Authorities Related To Source Of Source. In Our Considered View The Assessee Submitted Pan, Returns Of Income, Audited Financial Statements, Transactions Through Banking Channels. The Ld. Ar Invited Our Attention To The Jawala Ram 2024.12.10 17:53 I Attest To The Accuracy & Authenticity Of This Document

Section 68

Section 68, for undisclosed credit, the concerned assessee has to satisfy the identity of the party to the banking transactions, filing of the Income Tax Returns and credit worthiness. The DR as well as the appellant here do not raise objections regarding the genuineness of the identity of the party of the banking transactions and of filing of Income

OM PARKASH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 AAYAKAR BHAWAN JALANDHAR

ITA/338/2019HC Punjab & Haryana30 Mar 2022

Bench: MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA,MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN

Section 133(6)Section 145(3)Section 41(1)Section 41(1)(a)Section 44A

68,859,00 Cr. Total 4,60,581.00 Cr. 5. In the absence of any confirmation from the above parties, it was held that the trading liability amounting to Rs.4,60,581/- had ceased to exist as per provisions of Section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NEW DELHI vs. MANJIT SINGH BAIDWAN

ITA/59/2023HC Punjab & Haryana09 May 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

Section 54F

4 t t f MOHIT GOYAL 2024.05.17 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document ITA-59-2023 (O& a S C th th m I 5 h a w 0 h fo in d J (s is S &M) and the Chandigarh Bench of the Shri Jaswinder Singh Lota Vs Chd/2015 AY 2008-09, there

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

4. Learned counsel for the revenue has supported the order and submits that the ITAT is the final fact finding authority and this Court would not interfere with the order merely because it may conclude differently from what has been finally arrived at from the conclusion which have been drawn on the basis of the same facts. 5. We have