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.

55 results for “section 68”+ Section 41clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi4,065Mumbai3,349Bangalore1,201Chennai933Ahmedabad773Kolkata740Karnataka675Jaipur622Hyderabad597Pune404Indore362Chandigarh356Surat356Cochin233Raipur194Visakhapatnam164Agra121Rajkot121Cuttack112Nagpur109Lucknow102Telangana94Amritsar85Guwahati76Calcutta64Jabalpur61SC58Allahabad56Ranchi55Panaji51Patna31Dehradun30Jodhpur30Varanasi15Rajasthan12Orissa9Kerala6Uttarakhand3Punjab & Haryana1Himachal Pradesh1Andhra Pradesh1Tripura1

Key Topics

Addition to Income36Disallowance35Depreciation33Section 143(3)30Section 14A29Section 234A28Section 35E26Section 32(2)21Section 6819Section 263

ACIT, CIRCLE-3, RANCHI vs. SHRI SUMIT RAMSISARIA, RANCHI

ITA 222/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi11 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

section 68 of the Act. In view of above we find no reason to interfere in the order of ld. CIT(A). Hence this ground of Revenue is dismissed.” ITA No.222/R/2019 & C.O.12/R/2019 A.Y. 2014-15 ACIT, Cir-3,RAN Vs. Sh Sumit Ramsisaria Page 13 We accordingly find no reason to accept Revenue’s arguments seeking to revive

SHRI NAVNEET MODI,RANCHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 106/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Oct 2019AY 2015-16

Shri C.M.Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.106/Ran/2019 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.53/Ran/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2015-2016 & 2013-2014) Shri Navneet Modi, Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Ranchi Modi House, Kanke Dam Side Road, Kanke, Ranchi स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan No. : Actpm 1511 F (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Inderjeet Singh, Cit(Dr)

Showing 1–20 of 55 · Page 1 of 3

13
Undisclosed Income12
Section 132(4)11
Bench:
For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

section 41(1) or 68 of the Act.:- (i) That the purchase of the hides from the sundry creditors

ACIT,CIRCLE-2(1), HAZARIBAG vs. SANJAY KUMAR UPADHYAY, HAZARIBAG

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 94/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi28 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

68 of I.T. Act, the Ld.CIT (A) Hazaribag, erred in deleting the addition. The Ld.CIT (A) Hazaribag, relied upon the evidence put forwarded by the assessee before him in this regard and did not take into account the fact brought on the record by the Assessing officer.” 4. Ld. D/R vehemently argued supporting the finding

M/S ANJENEYE ISPAT LTD.,SARAIKELA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 74/RAN/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.74/Ran/2022 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Anjeneya Ispat Ltd.…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant 29, Rain Basera, Sanjay Nagar Colony, Adityapur, Saraikela, Jharkhand – 831013. [Pan: Aagca1031N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Jamshedpur……....….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 06, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Jamshedpur (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 21.08.2018 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Is Engaged In The Manufacturing Of Pig Iron. It Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of ₹1,41,05,250, Which Was Processed Under Section 143(1). During The Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Noticed That The Assessee Had Received Share Capital & Share Premium Aggregating To ₹3,00,00,000 During The Relevant Previous Year. The Assessing Officer Issued Notices Under Sections 142(1) & 148 Requiring The Assessee To Furnish Complete Details Of The Share Applicants, Including Identity, Creditworthiness & Genuineness Of The Transactions. In Response, The Assessee Furnished Complete Details In Respect Of The Share Capital/Share Premium Received From The Following Parties:

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 68

41,05,250, which was processed under section 143(1). During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had received share capital and share premium aggregating to ₹3,00,00,000 during the relevant previous year. The Assessing Officer issued notices under sections 142(1) and 148 requiring the assessee to furnish complete details

SUNILA DEVI SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C. C. , DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 427/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and applied the special rates of tax by treating it as undisclosed income. The Ld. AR has also filed a written submission as under: "1. That a search action U/s 132 was conducted upon the Atibir Group on 17/03/2021

KANTA DEVI SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C.C., DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 422/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and applied the special rates of tax by treating it as undisclosed income. The Ld. AR has also filed a written submission as under: "1. That a search action U/s 132 was conducted upon the Atibir Group on 17/03/2021

AAKRITI SARAWGI,,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 83/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and applied the special rates of tax by treating it as undisclosed income. The Ld. AR has also filed a written submission as under: "1. That a search action U/s 132 was conducted upon the Atibir Group on 17/03/2021

PARAS KUMAR SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C. C., DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 420/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and applied the special rates of tax by treating it as undisclosed income. The Ld. AR has also filed a written submission as under: "1. That a search action U/s 132 was conducted upon the Atibir Group on 17/03/2021

SANGITA DEVI SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C.C., DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 421/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and applied the special rates of tax by treating it as undisclosed income. The Ld. AR has also filed a written submission as under: "1. That a search action U/s 132 was conducted upon the Atibir Group on 17/03/2021

SANTOSH KUMAR SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C. C., DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 426/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and applied the special rates of tax by treating it as undisclosed income. The Ld. AR has also filed a written submission as under: "1. That a search action U/s 132 was conducted upon the Atibir Group on 17/03/2021

MANJU DEVI SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 82/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and applied the special rates of tax by treating it as undisclosed income. The Ld. AR has also filed a written submission as under: "1. That a search action U/s 132 was conducted upon the Atibir Group on 17/03/2021

HARISH KUMAR SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C.C., DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 425/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and applied the special rates of tax by treating it as undisclosed income. The Ld. AR has also filed a written submission as under: "1. That a search action U/s 132 was conducted upon the Atibir Group on 17/03/2021

SAMIR KUMAR SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C. C., DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 423/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and applied the special rates of tax by treating it as undisclosed income. The Ld. AR has also filed a written submission as under: "1. That a search action U/s 132 was conducted upon the Atibir Group on 17/03/2021

RAJESH BADRI PD. MODI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 418/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and applied the special rates of tax by treating it as undisclosed income. The Ld. AR has also filed a written submission as under: "1. That a search action U/s 132 was conducted upon the Atibir Group on 17/03/2021

SALUJA STEEL AND POWER PVT. LTD.,,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C, C., DHANBAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 287/RAN/2025[13-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Jan 2026

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 156

41 of the paper book which is the company information in respect of both the companies, which read as follows :- 7. It was the submission that Riddhi Siddhi Investment Consultants Pvt. Ltd. is a group concern. Ganeev Associate is a partnership firm wherein some of the directors with the assessee company are also partners. Ld. AR submitted that

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), DHANBAD vs. M/S HIMANGSU MAHTO, DHANBAD

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

ITA 2/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi21 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 68

Section 68 of the Act. Consequently, Ld. CIT(A) also allowed the interest on this loan of Rs. 41

DCIT CIRCLE-3, BOKARO vs. YAVVARI NARAYAN RAO, BOKARO

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 246/RAN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalea.Y. : 2010-2011 Dcit, Circle-3, Bokaro Vs Shri Yavvari Narayan Rao, A-1, Sector Market-1, Ram Mandir, Sec-1, B.S.City-827001 Pan No. : Aajcs 7786 F Respondent (Appellant) . Revenue By :Shri A.K.Mohanty, Jcit Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 28.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2018 O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohanty, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 44

68,370/-. Therefore, in my j considered opinion, no addition is required on this issue. Reliance is placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Vs. C1T (245 ITR, 428). The appellant succeeds on this ground of appeal. The Assessing Officer is. however, free to invoke the provisions of Section 41

PREM INDUSTRIES,RANCHI vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-3, RANCHI

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

ITA 52/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 Dec 2022AY 2015-16
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69

68,05,870/-, which included an amount of Rs.60 lacs admitted as undisclosed income on account of excess stock found during the course of survey. After the case being selected for scrutiny followed by serving of valid notices u/s. 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act the ld. AO carried out the assessment proceedings. Further the submissions were filed reconciling

DCIT, HAZARIBAGH vs. SRI RAJENDRA LAL, HAZARIBAGH

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

ITA 78/RAN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi25 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Cross Objection No.05/Ran/2018 A.Y. : 2009-2010 Shri Rajendra Lal, Vs Acit, Circle-2, Prop: M/S Alankar Jewellers Hazaribag Malviya Marg, Hazaribag Pan No. : Aaqpl 6547 B Respondent (Appellant) . & A.Y. : 2009-2010 Acit, Circle-2, Hazaribag Vs Shri Rajendra Lal, Prop: M/S Alankar Jewellers Malviya Marg, Hazaribag Pan No. : Aaqpl 6547 B Respondent (Appellant) .

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Poddar & Devesh Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohanty, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 69

section 68, where any sum is found credited in the books of the assessee for any previous year, the same may be charged to income-tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year if the explanation offered by the assessee about the nature and source thereof is, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, not satisfactory

CCL,RNCHI vs. ACIT CIR-1 , RANCHI

ITA 167/RAN/2017[09-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Jan 2026
Section 14ASection 234ASection 35E

41,00,000 63,00,00,000\n11 Provision for NCWA\n2,89,76,00,000\n12 Executive Pay Rivision\n12,86,00,000\n1,36,26,00,000\n13 Siding Maintenance Expenses\n22,87,00,000\n21,00,000\n23,22,00,000\n10,68,00,000\n14 Miscellaneous Expenses