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.

3 results for “section 68”+ Section 43Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi471Mumbai445Kolkata203Ahmedabad134Chennai132Bangalore122Pune68Jaipur68Agra67Hyderabad56Raipur50Visakhapatnam40Cuttack31Lucknow29Cochin22Chandigarh21Indore17Surat16Nagpur11Rajkot10Guwahati10Jodhpur8Allahabad6Varanasi6Jabalpur5SC3Ranchi3Karnataka3Amritsar2Dehradun2Patna1

Key Topics

Section 36(1)(vii)4Section 43B4Section 2143Section 37(1)2Deduction2

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX II vs. M/S MODIPON LTD

The appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed reportable

C.A. No.-019763-019763 - 2017Supreme Court24 Nov 2017

Bench: Delving Into The Question Formulated One Significant Fact Common To The Appeals Involving The Assessee-Modipon Ltd. May Be Noted. From The Assessment Year 1984-1985 (From Which Assessment Year

Section 43B

43B. Accordingly the orders of the High Courts challenged in the appeals are liable to interference. 6. In reply, Shri Ajay Vohra, learned senior counsel appearing for the assessee has submitted that the practice followed by the assessee in claiming deduction for the balance amount in the PLA at the end of each accounting year and adding back the same

M/S. SOUTHERN TECHNOLOGIES LTD. vs. JOINT COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, COIMBATORE

C.A. No.-001337-001337 - 2003Supreme Court11 Jan 2010
Section 145Section 2(24)
Section 36(1)(vii)
Section 37
Section 37(1)

68,516/- to the taxable income on the ground that the provision for bad and doubtful debt was not allowable under Section 36(1)(vii) of the IT Act. The appellant claimed that the “Provision for NPA”, however, represented “loss” in the value of assets and was, therefore, allowable under Section 37(1) of the IT Act. This

SANDVIK ASIA LTD. vs. COMMNR.OF INCOME TAX-I, PUNE

In the result, the appeals stand allowed

C.A. No.-001337-001340 - 2005Supreme Court27 Jan 2006
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Pune & Ors
Section 214Section 264

68,88,220/- and tax thereon at Rs.1,47,88,521. The appellant on 30.04.1986 received a refund of Rs.42,38,260/- and became entitled to receive interest on the refund and requested respondent No.2 to grant interest on refund under Sections 214 and 244 of the Act for the period from 01.4.1977 to 31.03.1986. Assessment Year