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.

106 results for “section 68”+ Section 79clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,842Mumbai2,341Bangalore857Karnataka619Chennai564Ahmedabad533Jaipur453Kolkata448Hyderabad349Indore323Surat288Cochin256Chandigarh244Pune227Raipur140Visakhapatnam119Cuttack109Rajkot106Nagpur80Telangana79Lucknow73Calcutta64Guwahati44Agra38Allahabad36SC34Amritsar30Ranchi22Dehradun19Jodhpur18Jabalpur15Varanasi12Patna10Rajasthan9Orissa8Panaji7Uttarakhand3Gauhati1ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1Andhra Pradesh1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Addition to Income51Section 143(3)46Section 14737Section 14829Section 271(1)(c)28Section 6828Section 25024Disallowance22Section 69A21Penalty

SHRI KAMLESH DEORAJ JAIN,GANDHIDHAM KUTCHH vs. THE ITO WARD 1 , GANDHIDHAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 62/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 62/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2018-19) Kamlesh Deoraj Jain Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Plot No 35-36, Devashish Gandhidham, Income Tax Vs. Sector-5 Gandhidham 370201 Office, Plot No.32, Sector No.3, Near Iffco Colony, Gandhidham-370 201 "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adopj1769Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Puglia, CIT-D.R
Section 144ASection 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

section 68 of the Act, if they are circular in nature. 17. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, also explained the Bench that there are lot of differences between bogus purchase and circular trading/ circular transaction, which is the facts of present case of the assessee under consideration. The table below, submitted by the ld. Counsel explains the difference

Showing 1–20 of 106 · Page 1 of 6

18
Section 13217
Deduction13

THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. SMT. MANISHABEN N. MASHRU,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 355/RJT/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Jan 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Rajpal Yadavsr.No.

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Ranpura, CAFor Respondent: Shri Hargovind Singh, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

68 of the Act. The assessee has pointed out to the ld.CIT(A) that the AO has erred in assuming narrations mentioned in these papers as representing cash credit. Remand report was called for by the ld.CIT(A) and ultimately, it was held by the ld.CIT(A) that rough entries having value of Rs.38,77,759/- could not reconciled

SMT. KRUSHNABA PRAVINSINH JADEJA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(1),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

ITA 572/RJT/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jul 2025AY 2012-13
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

section 68 of the Act.\"\nHowever, the Assessing Officer, rejected the above contention of\nthe assessee and observed that assessee has failed to prove identity,\nPage | 14\nITA Nos.572&577/RJT/2015/AY.2012-13\nKrushnaba Pravinsinh Jadeja\ngenuineness and creditworthiness of the transactions, therefore, made\naddition of Rs. 83,00,000/- u/s. 68 of the Act.\n24.\nOn appeal, by the assessee

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(1), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. SMT. KRUSHNABA P. JADEJA,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

ITA 577/RJT/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

section 68 of the Act."” 23. However, the Assessing Officer, rejected the above contention of the assessee and observed that assessee has failed to prove identity, ITA Nos.572&577/RJT/2015/AY.2012-13 Krushnaba Pravinsinh Jadeja genuineness and creditworthiness of the transactions, therefore, made addition of Rs. 83,00,000/- u/s. 68 of the Act. 24. On appeal, by the assessee

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-2,, JUNAGADH vs. SHRI DAMJIBHAI LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI,, JUNAGADH

ITA 31/RJT/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

section 68, 69, 69A to 69D of the IT Act and as such, in the light of non-\ndisputed fact that unexplained credit whether found in the bank statement of the\nassessee, who regularly maintain books of accounts. Ld. ITAT should have agreed to legal-\nplea of the Revenue that till onus with respect to identity, credit worthiness

BHARATKUMAR ISHWARBHAI BHATIYA,,RAJKOT vs. ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.-1,, RAJKOT

ITA 4/RJT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

section 68, 69, 69A to 69D of the IT Act and as such, in the light of non-\ndisputed fact that unexplained credit whether found in the bank statement of the\nassessee, who regularly maintain books of accounts. Ld. ITAT should have agreed to legal-\nplea of the Revenue that till onus with respect to identity, credit worthiness

THE ITO WARD-1 (2) (1),, RAJKOT vs. SHRI KHRAJMAL LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI, RAJKOT

ITA 135/RJT/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jun 2025AY 2008-09

section 68, 69, 69A to 69D of the IT Act and as such, in the light of non-\ndisputed fact that unexplained credit whether found in the bank statement of the\nassessee, who regularly maintain books of accounts. Ld. ITAT should have agreed to legal-\nplea of the Revenue that till onus with respect to identity, credit worthiness

SOLO STEEL TECH,RAJKOT vs. THE PCIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 316/RJT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Jul 2025AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40A

section 68, 69, 69A to 69D of the IT Act\nand as such, in the light of non-disputed fact that unexplained credit\nwhether found in the bank statement of the assessee, who regularly\nmaintain books of accounts. Ld. ITAT should have agreed to legal-plea of\nthe Revenue that till onus with respect to identity, credit worthiness

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT vs. SHRI PANKAJ CHIMANLAL LODHIYA, RAJKOT

ITA 48/RJT/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

79,400/- on account of\nundisclosed income which used for purchase of cheques/DDs from M/s. Siddhanath\nEnterprise.\"\n[This is common ground no.6 in Revenue's appeal in ITA No. 46/RJT/2019 for AY 2010-11,\nground no. 7 in ITA No. 47/RJT/2019 for AY 2011-12, ground no. 8 in ITA No.\n48/RJT/2019 for AY 2012-13]\n29.This summarized

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT vs. SHRI PANKAJ CHIMANLAL LODHIYA, RAJKOT

Appeals are dismissed, Assessee's appeals are partly allowed

ITA 47/RJT/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

79,400/- on account of\nundisclosed income which used for purchase of cheques/DDs from M/s. Siddhanath\nEnterprise.\"\n[This is common ground no.6 in Revenue's appeal in ITA No. 46/RJT/2019 for AY 2010-11,\nground no. 7 in ITA No. 47/RJT/2019 for AY 2011-12, ground no. 8 in ITA No.\n48/RJT/2019 for AY 2012-13]\n29.This summarized

SHRI BHARATKUMAR IASHWARBHAI BHATIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRL-1,, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue, in ITA No

ITA 44/RJT/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jun 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 134 & 135/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08 & 2008-09) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shri Kherajmal Lekhrajbjai 5Th 1(2)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, Thavrani, 4- Parsana Nagar, Shri Vs. Floor, Room No. 517, Race Vaheguru Grupa, Near Refugee Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 Colony, Rajkot-360 001 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Adrpt 5807 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 68, 69, 69A to 69D of the IT Act and as such, in the light of non- disputed fact that unexplained credit whether found in the bank statement of the assessee, who regularly maintain books of accounts. Ld. ITAT should have agreed to legal- plea of the Revenue that till onus with respect to identity, credit worthiness

M/S. EMBOZA GRANITO PVT. LTD. ,MORBI vs. THE PR. CIT-3 , RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 240/RJT/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 240/Rjt/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2016-2017

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT. D.R
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32ASection 68

section 68 for domestic companies with regard to source of source we have enclosed Personal balance sheets of all possible shareholders, while proofs relating to identity genuineness and creditworthiness are as per Annexure-1 1 During the year under consideration Share capital of A sheet showing the Rs.18,50,00,000/- has been introduced. You have acceptance, conversion

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BUILDCON CREATIONS LLP, RAJKOT

ITA 678/RJT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 539 To 542/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2019-20 To 2022-23) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani / Ms. Devina Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

79,68,556/- being unaccounted profit was made by the assessing officer, over and above the regular business income reported by the assessee in the Income-tax Return filed for the year under consideration, invoking provisions of section

BUILDCON CREATIONS LLP,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, , RAJKOT

ITA 542/RJT/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 539 To 542/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2019-20 To 2022-23) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani / Ms. Devina Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

79,68,556/- being unaccounted profit was made by the assessing officer, over and above the regular business income reported by the assessee in the Income-tax Return filed for the year under consideration, invoking provisions of section

BUILDCON CREATIONS LLP,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1, RAJKOT

ITA 541/RJT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 539 To 542/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2019-20 To 2022-23) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani / Ms. Devina Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

79,68,556/- being unaccounted profit was made by the assessing officer, over and above the regular business income reported by the assessee in the Income-tax Return filed for the year under consideration, invoking provisions of section

BUILDCON CREATIONS LLP,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1,, RAJKOT

ITA 540/RJT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 539 To 542/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2019-20 To 2022-23) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani / Ms. Devina Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

79,68,556/- being unaccounted profit was made by the assessing officer, over and above the regular business income reported by the assessee in the Income-tax Return filed for the year under consideration, invoking provisions of section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BUILDCON CREATIONS LLP, RAJKOT

ITA 676/RJT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 539 To 542/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2019-20 To 2022-23) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani / Ms. Devina Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

79,68,556/- being unaccounted profit was made by the assessing officer, over and above the regular business income reported by the assessee in the Income-tax Return filed for the year under consideration, invoking provisions of section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BUILDCON CREATIONS LLP, RAJKOT

ITA 679/RJT/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 539 To 542/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2019-20 To 2022-23) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani / Ms. Devina Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

79,68,556/- being unaccounted profit was made by the assessing officer, over and above the regular business income reported by the assessee in the Income-tax Return filed for the year under consideration, invoking provisions of section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BUILDCON CREATIONS LLP, RAJKOT

ITA 677/RJT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 539 To 542/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2019-20 To 2022-23) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani / Ms. Devina Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

79,68,556/- being unaccounted profit was made by the assessing officer, over and above the regular business income reported by the assessee in the Income-tax Return filed for the year under consideration, invoking provisions of section

BUILDCON CREATIONS LLP,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1,, RAJKOT

ITA 539/RJT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 539 To 542/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2019-20 To 2022-23) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani / Ms. Devina Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

79,68,556/- being unaccounted profit was made by the assessing officer, over and above the regular business income reported by the assessee in the Income-tax Return filed for the year under consideration, invoking provisions of section