Search: section 68 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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 430clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi486 Mumbai363 Karnataka288 Chennai151 Bangalore110 Jaipur86 Ahmedabad73 Agra63 Kolkata60 Chandigarh56 Hyderabad55 Calcutta51 Pune45 Telangana40 Indore24 Nagpur20 Surat20 Cochin18 Guwahati17 Visakhapatnam9 Rajkot9 Lucknow8 Cuttack7 Raipur6 SC6 Varanasi5 Rajasthan3 Jodhpur3 Amritsar2 Patna2 Orissa2 Jabalpur2 Dehradun1 Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 17(5)(d)7 Section 25 Section 6(1)3 Section 143(2)3 Section 652 Section 6(2)2 Section 922

CENTRAL GST DELHI III vs. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD

C.A. No.-008996 - 2019Supreme Court19 May 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT

Section 13Section 22ASection 3Section 65Section 66Section 67Section 68

430 4 5. Section 68 (1) of the Finance Act provides that every person providing taxable service to any person

HINDUSTAN POLES CORPORATION vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALCUTTA

Appeals are allowed and show cause

C.A. No.-005572-005573 - 2000

Supreme Court

27 Mar 2006

For Respondent: Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta

Section 2

Section 2(f) of the Act. According to the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta-I dated 30.7.1991 the process which had been undertaken by the appellants is that the poles are brought out under the new Tariff Item No. 7308.90 and the appellants are under an obligation to pay duty and penalty. The appellants, aggrieved

INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ANR. vs. V.MOHAN AND ANR

C.A. No.-008592-008593 - 2010Supreme Court14 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR

Section 2Section 2(2)(c)Section 6Section 6(1)Section 6(2)

430, has laid down principles and rules for ascertaining the mandatory or directory nature of provisions, and has noted that this depends on the intent of the legislature and not necessarily on the language that the intent is clothed in. The nature and design of the statute, the effects which would follow  S. Narayanappa & Ors. v. Commissioner of Incometax, Bangalore

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS vs. M/S CANON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

R.P.(C) No.-000400 - 2021Supreme Court07 Nov 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA

430 OF 2017 C.A. No. 8749 OF 2016 C.A. No. 6127 OF 2019 C.A. No. 8752 OF 2017 C.A. No.

VODAFONE IDEA LTD(EARLIER KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 26 (2)

C.A. No.-002377-002377 - 2020Supreme Court29 Apr 2020

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 143(2)Section 244ASection 92

430/- 2011-12 Corporate Tax Assessment u/s 143(3) 2,11,61,29,711/- 2,11,61,29,411/- Thereafter, it went on to state:- "It is also to be noted that earlier refund was withheld vide notesheet dated 23.07.2018 after due approval due to non-availability of proceeding of return facility in ITBA for AY 2017-18 which

CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX vs. M/S SAFARI RETREATS PRIVATE LIMITED

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

C.A. No.-002948-002948 - 2023Supreme Court03 Oct 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA

Section 17Section 17(5)(c)Section 17(5)(d)

Section 32, as discussed above, clearly envisages separate depreciation for a building, machinery and plant, furniture and fittings etc. The word “plant” is given inclusive meaning under Section 43(3) which nowhere includes buildings. The Civil Appeal No.2948 of 2023 etc. Page 68 of 91 Rules prescribing the rates of depreciation specifically provide grant of depreciation on buildings