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.

34 results for “section 68”+ Section 77clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,839Mumbai2,279Bangalore821Karnataka621Chennai614Ahmedabad583Jaipur492Kolkata455Hyderabad435Indore312Pune310Surat262Chandigarh256Cochin220Raipur106Visakhapatnam104Agra99Rajkot89Telangana79Cuttack71Nagpur67Jabalpur62Calcutta61Lucknow52Amritsar48SC44Allahabad35Ranchi34Guwahati32Panaji30Jodhpur25Dehradun13Patna10Orissa8Varanasi7Rajasthan7Andhra Pradesh1Kerala1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Addition to Income32Section 14A27Section 234A26Section 35E24Section 143(3)23Section 6819Disallowance19Section 32(2)16Depreciation15Unexplained Cash Credit

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

Bench: 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)

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

68 for the year under consideration. As such, Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition made by the Ld. AO to the tune of opening balance for the year under consideration. As such, the addition made is fit to be deleted. 3. For that for the year under consideration there was an additional sundry creditors

Showing 1–20 of 34 · Page 1 of 2

12
Business Income11
Section 139(1)10

M/S MANIKARAN POWER LTD,RANCHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 471/RAN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi08 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayit(Ss)A No. 01/Ran/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) A.C.I.T., Manikaran Power Limited, Central Circle-2, Manikaran Tower, Kilburn Colony, Vs. Ranchi. P.O. Hinoo, Ranchi-834002 (Jharkhand) J.C.I.T. (In Situ), Pan No. Aaecm 4555 F Ranchi. Revenue/ Appellant Respondent/ Assessee Manikaran Power Limited, A.C.I.T., Manikaran Tower, Kilburn Colony, Central Circle-2, Vs. P.O. Hinoo, Ranchi-834002 Ranchi. (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aaecm 4555 F Revenue/ Appellant Respondent/ Assessee

77,52,226/- from any of the sellers of power. It was a submission that the said addition itself was not called for much less under Section 37(1) or Section 68

KAMESHWAR ALLOYS AND STEELS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 49/RAN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi14 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.49/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kameshwar Alloys & Steels Pvt. Ltd….…............................……….……Appellant 128/3, Hazra Road, Bhawanipur, Kol-700026.. [Pan: Aadck6558K] Vs. Acit, Cc-1, Ranchi.................……….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Md. Shadab Ahmed, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 14, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Patna (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 05.02.2024 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, Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year Under Consideration. The Case Was Originally Selected For Scrutiny On The Issue Of Share Capital & Share Premium Received During The Year. The Assessing Officer Completed The Assessment Ex Parte Under Section 144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, On The Ground Of Alleged Non-Compliance & Made An Addition Of ₹2,00,00,000 Being Share Capital & Share Premium Received From Various Companies, Treating The Same As Unexplained Under Section 68 Of The Act. Subsequently, A Search & Seizure Operation Under

Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 250Section 68

section 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit and also disallowed ₹14,182 towards penal expenses. 3. Aggrieved the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), where the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) sustained the addition of ₹2,00,00,000. 4. Dissatisfied with the order

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ACIT CIRCLE-1, DHANBAD vs. SRI VIKASH AGARWAL, DHANBAD

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 133/RAN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 133(6)

Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) is not sustainable in the eyes of law on the ground that the said transactions were merely by way of book adjustments, journal entries and there is no actual cash/cheque receipts. 7. Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A), the revenue has preferred this appeal

SRI KAMLESH KUMAR SINGH,DALTONGANJ vs. ACIT,CIR-1, RANCHI

ITA 53/RAN/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 49/Ran/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Smt. Madhu Singh,...................................Appellant Hamidganj, Daltonganj-822101 [Pan: Bbjps0426B] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-1, Ranchi & I.T.A. Nos. 53 & 54/Ran/2017 Assessment Years: 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 Shri Kamlesh Kumar Singh,...................Appellant Hamidganj, Daltonganj-822101 [Pan: Afzps8288J] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-1, Ranchi Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.K. Koley, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 22, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 7Th, 2023 1 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Smt. Madhu Singh & Ita Nos. 53 & 54/Ran/2017 Assessment Years: 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 Shri Kamlesh Kr. Singh

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 234A

77,000/- and added on protective basis in the hands of assessee and on substantive basis in the hands of assessee’s husband Sri Kamlesh Kumar Singh. The ld. Assessing Officer also noticed that during the year the assessee has taken loan from her husband and one from Surya Sonal Singh, her son. So far as the loan taken from

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, RANCHI vs. SHRI KAMAL BHUSHAN, RANCHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue and the cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 8/RAN/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi15 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma] I.T.(Ss)A. No. 1/Ran/2021 I.T.(Ss)A. No. 5/Ran/2019

Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 68Section 69C

section 68 which has been cross checked with the details submitted in the paper book and as such. It is also observed that the assessing officer at time of assessment has failed to look into the submissions of the appellant and for that matter give any categorical finding for making the addition as from the order of assessment

DCIT,CIRCLE-1,RANCHI, RANCHI vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD, RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 217/RAN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaym/S Central Coalfields Ltd., D.C.I.T., Darbhanga House, Kutchery Road, Circle-1, Vs. Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Ranchi. Pan No. Aaacc 7476 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue D.C.I.T., Central Coalfield Ltd., Circle-1, 4Th Floor, Central Revenue Building Vs. Ranchi. Annexee, 5A, Main Road, Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aaacc 7476 R Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40

77,17,000/- The penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act were separately initiated with the issue of notice under Section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act and finally, the Assessing Officer vide the impugned penalty order imposed a penalty of ₹ 2,68

M/S. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD.,,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue\nis dismissed

ITA 210/RAN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 Feb 2026AY 2010-11
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40

77,17,000/-\nThe penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act were separately\ninitiated with the issue of notice under Section 274 read with section 271(1)(c)\nof the Act and finally, the Assessing Officer vide the impugned penalty order\nimposed a penalty of ₹ 2,68

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/- could not been paid fully but a sum of Rs. 35,77,253/- has been paid in F/Y- 2010-11 again a sum of Rs. 32,91,117/- has been paid in F/Y-2011-12. The practical difficulty to defer the payment is due to non release of the retention money of Rs. 41,74,148/- by the principal contractor

ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD vs. M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LTD , DHANBAD

ITA 300/RAN/2017[09-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(2)

Section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D of\nthe Rules were applicable on the assessee and after giving a show\ncause computed the disallowance at Rs. 27,19,753/- comprising of\nRs. 9,11,753/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and Rs. 17,32,000/- under Rule\n8D(2)(iii) of the Rules