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 5(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi10,775Mumbai9,574Kolkata3,195Bangalore2,575Ahmedabad2,218Chennai2,180Jaipur1,527Hyderabad1,412Pune1,333Surat950Chandigarh901Indore842Karnataka806Cochin641Rajkot482Raipur459Visakhapatnam421Lucknow307Nagpur298Amritsar273Agra252Cuttack244Guwahati233Telangana161Patna158Jodhpur146Ranchi139Calcutta135SC127Jabalpur119Panaji108Dehradun104Allahabad104Varanasi50Rajasthan22Orissa13Kerala13Punjab & 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

5. The defence as such in response to the notice dated 22.12.2014 issued under Section 142 (1) of the Act was that he had visited U.K three times in the year 1985, 2006 and 2012 and had not opened any type of account in the U.K or any other country. He was an agriculturist and totally illiterate and permanent

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

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 is no he Id. CIT(A) to interfere with th he rival submissions of the pa material on record including the c Id. counsel

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

2. It is settled law that for the purpose of additions under 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

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

2,05,000/-, ` 45,000/-, ` 80,000/-, ` 1,00,000/- and ` 70,000/- in various years from 2003 to 2006. Copies of the bank statements have been also placed in order to confirm the submissions made by the appellant with regard to the fact that the amount of ` 5,00,000/- was still due to be paid and the 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

2,91,722.00 Cr. (ii) Satish Surgincal Works 01.04.2013 Opening balance B/F 1,68,859,00 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 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

2. Counsel for the appellant has pressed the following substantial question of law:- “(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the action of the authorities below is right in the law in allowing the appeal of the assessee by ignoring the fact that the donations amounting to Rs.13,18,82,040/- were not corpus donations