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.

7 results for “section 68”+ Section 271D(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi57Jaipur54Mumbai41Hyderabad27Chennai26Karnataka21Ahmedabad19Kolkata14Pune13Indore12Agra9Bangalore9Surat7Rajkot5Chandigarh3Cuttack3Jabalpur2Nagpur2Visakhapatnam2Lucknow1Ranchi1SC1Cochin1Varanasi1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 26345Section 143(3)15Section 153C11Section 271D6Section 254(1)5Section 133A5Section 142(1)5Survey u/s 133A5Limitation/Time-bar5Section 269S

SATYAM TEXTILE PARK,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 91/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Oct 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 263Section 271DSection 40

271D of the Act,  Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) and 40A(3),  Validity of declaration made under IDS. 4. The ld. PCIT recorded that the assessee was given opportunity of hearing on 12.03.2021 and 18.03.2021, however, the assessee neither attended the hearing nor filed written submission in respect of proposed revisions proceedings under section

3
Penalty3
Disallowance3

SATYAM TEXTILE PARK,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 90/SRT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 263Section 271DSection 40

271D of the Act,  Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) and 40A(3),  Validity of declaration made under IDS. 4. The ld. PCIT recorded that the assessee was given opportunity of hearing on 12.03.2021 and 18.03.2021, however, the assessee neither attended the hearing nor filed written submission in respect of proposed revisions proceedings under section

AMRUT SAROVAR,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISIONER INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), SURAT

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in all three assessment years are allowed

ITA 92/SRT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 263

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm. The assessee is engaged in the business of construction and development of housing projects. There is four partners in firm namely BhaveshDhirubhaiPadhgal, Harshukh Vallabhbhai Bhanderi, Arun Kumar ManubhaiKakadia and Nareshbhai Vallabhbhai Paghdal having share of 28.33%, @28.33%, 15% and 28.34% respectively. A survey action under section

AMRUT SAROVAR,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISIONER INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), SURAT

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in all three assessment years are allowed

ITA 93/SRT/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 263

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm. The assessee is engaged in the business of construction and development of housing projects. There is four partners in firm namely BhaveshDhirubhaiPadhgal, Harshukh Vallabhbhai Bhanderi, Arun Kumar ManubhaiKakadia and Nareshbhai Vallabhbhai Paghdal having share of 28.33%, @28.33%, 15% and 28.34% respectively. A survey action under section

AMRUT SAROVAR,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISIONER INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), SURAT

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in all three assessment years are allowed

ITA 94/SRT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 263

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm. The assessee is engaged in the business of construction and development of housing projects. There is four partners in firm namely BhaveshDhirubhaiPadhgal, Harshukh Vallabhbhai Bhanderi, Arun Kumar ManubhaiKakadia and Nareshbhai Vallabhbhai Paghdal having share of 28.33%, @28.33%, 15% and 28.34% respectively. A survey action under section

SHRI JIVRAJBHAI H. BALAR,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(2),, SURAT

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2004-05 to 2007-08, ( IT(SS)A Nos

ITA 1245/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./It(Ss)A No.150 To 154/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2004-05 To 2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) Jivrajbhai Harkhabhai Balar, The Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. 59, Kantareshwar Society, Surat. Katargam Road, Surat-395004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abopb8649M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1245/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2010-11) Jivrajbhai Harkhabhai Balar, Vs. The Dcit, Central Circle-1, 59, Kantareshwar Society, Surat. Katargam Road, Surat-395004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abopb8649M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri H. P. Meena, CIT(DR) & Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153C

68,80,493/- was disallowed by the assessing officer. 16. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld CIT(A) adjudicated the issue relating to validity of assessment under section 153C of the Act, observing as follows: Apparently, the 1st ground in the original grounds

THE ITO, WARD -1,, SURAT vs. SHREE MADHI SURALI VIBHAG NAGRIK SAHAKARI DHIRAN MANDLI LTD., SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 612/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat12 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon'Ble & Shri O.P.Meena, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.612/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shree Madhi Surali Vibhag Nagrik, Ward-1, Bardoli. Sahakari Dhiran Mandli Ltd., Madhi, Tal.Bardoli, Dist: Surat. [Pan: Aadas 5644 L] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Shaunak Zaveri– Ca & Shri Yogesh Gamit - Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Shri Sreenivas T.Bidari – Cit-Dr

Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271Section 271DSection 271ESection 274

2. During the course of penalty proceedings, a show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271D and 271E of the Act was issued and duly served upon the assessee. After considering the reply of the assessee, the Jt. CIT, Range- 6, Surat imposed the Penalty u/s. 271D and u/s. 271E of the Act to the tune