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.

548 results for “section 68”+ Section 6(1)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi6,749Mumbai6,085Bangalore1,945Kolkata1,878Ahmedabad1,459Chennai1,369Jaipur1,131Hyderabad785Karnataka721Pune700Chandigarh598Surat548Indore497Cochin429Raipur274Rajkot270Visakhapatnam231Lucknow182Amritsar168Nagpur160Cuttack158Agra150Guwahati143Telangana113SC103Calcutta87Jodhpur75Ranchi70Panaji70Allahabad62Patna57Dehradun42Varanasi29Jabalpur26Rajasthan16Kerala11Orissa11A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Punjab & Haryana3Uttarakhand3Gauhati2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Andhra Pradesh1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1HARJIT SINGH BEDI CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD1ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1

Key Topics

Addition to Income83Section 143(3)82Section 26358Section 6847Disallowance26Section 271(1)(c)23Section 14A23Section 14721Cash Deposit21Section 148

SHRI GUFRAN AHMED CHAUDHARI,,VALSAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, VAPI WARD-1,, VAPI

In the result, appeals of the Assessees (in ITA No

ITA 623/SRT/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.618/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Prakash F Singh, The Income Tax Officer, V Ward-7, Room No.810, 8Th Floor, Rbl, 63/751, Chanod Colony, Gidc, S. Vapi-396195 Fortune Square-Ii, Vapi Daman Road, Chala, Vapi-396191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Asnps 4835N (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A. Gopalakrishnan,C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. AnupamaSingla– Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

68 of the Act by relying upon the same books of account. Learned Counsel also argues that assessing officer has issued defective notice to levy penalty, that is, assessing officer did not specify any limb whether penalty is on ITA Nos.618 & 623/SRT/2018 A.Y. 2011-13 Prakash F Singh &Gurfan A Chaudhury account of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or concealment

Showing 1–20 of 548 · Page 1 of 28

...
19
Section 254(1)19
Survey u/s 133A17

SHRI PRAKASH F.SINGH,,VAPI vs. THE ITO, WARD-7,, VAPI

In the result, appeals of the Assessees (in ITA No

ITA 618/SRT/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.618/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Prakash F Singh, The Income Tax Officer, V Ward-7, Room No.810, 8Th Floor, Rbl, 63/751, Chanod Colony, Gidc, S. Vapi-396195 Fortune Square-Ii, Vapi Daman Road, Chala, Vapi-396191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Asnps 4835N (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A. Gopalakrishnan,C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. AnupamaSingla– Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

68 of the Act by relying upon the same books of account. Learned Counsel also argues that assessing officer has issued defective notice to levy penalty, that is, assessing officer did not specify any limb whether penalty is on ITA Nos.618 & 623/SRT/2018 A.Y. 2011-13 Prakash F Singh &Gurfan A Chaudhury account of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or concealment

THE ITO, WARD-2(3)(1),, SURAT vs. M/S. AVANTIS ENTERPRISE,, SURAT

In the result, all the Nine Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above table at page 1 & 2 filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2970/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c).” 6. Relying on the said para the ld.CIT-DR inviting our attention to the impugned order submitted that relief has been granted by the CIT(A) for the reasons set out in para 7 to 7.2 which is assailed by the Revenue. The relevant extract which is common in these group of cases is extracted

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S. CHHAYA ASSOCIATES,, SURAT

In the result, all the Nine Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above table at page 1 & 2 filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2965/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c).” 6. Relying on the said para the ld.CIT-DR inviting our attention to the impugned order submitted that relief has been granted by the CIT(A) for the reasons set out in para 7 to 7.2 which is assailed by the Revenue. The relevant extract which is common in these group of cases is extracted

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S. MILESTONE BUILDERS,, SURAT

In the result, all the Nine Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above table at page 1 & 2 filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2963/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c).” 6. Relying on the said para the ld.CIT-DR inviting our attention to the impugned order submitted that relief has been granted by the CIT(A) for the reasons set out in para 7 to 7.2 which is assailed by the Revenue. The relevant extract which is common in these group of cases is extracted

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S. SHAH & DESAI CONSTRUCTION,, SURAT

In the result, all the Nine Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above table at page 1 & 2 filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3024/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c).” 6. Relying on the said para the ld.CIT-DR inviting our attention to the impugned order submitted that relief has been granted by the CIT(A) for the reasons set out in para 7 to 7.2 which is assailed by the Revenue. The relevant extract which is common in these group of cases is extracted

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT vs. M/S. PRIME DEVELOPERS,, SURAT

In the result, all the Nine Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above table at page 1 & 2 filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2971/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c).” 6. Relying on the said para the ld.CIT-DR inviting our attention to the impugned order submitted that relief has been granted by the CIT(A) for the reasons set out in para 7 to 7.2 which is assailed by the Revenue. The relevant extract which is common in these group of cases is extracted

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S. SHANTINATH DEVELOPERS,, SURAT

In the result, all the Nine Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above table at page 1 & 2 filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3025/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c).” 6. Relying on the said para the ld.CIT-DR inviting our attention to the impugned order submitted that relief has been granted by the CIT(A) for the reasons set out in para 7 to 7.2 which is assailed by the Revenue. The relevant extract which is common in these group of cases is extracted

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT vs. M/S. VIP CORPORATION,, SURAT

In the result, all the Nine Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above table at page 1 & 2 filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3047/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c).” 6. Relying on the said para the ld.CIT-DR inviting our attention to the impugned order submitted that relief has been granted by the CIT(A) for the reasons set out in para 7 to 7.2 which is assailed by the Revenue. The relevant extract which is common in these group of cases is extracted

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S. MILESTONE CONSTRUCTION,, SURAT

In the result, all the Nine Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above table at page 1 & 2 filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2962/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c).” 6. Relying on the said para the ld.CIT-DR inviting our attention to the impugned order submitted that relief has been granted by the CIT(A) for the reasons set out in para 7 to 7.2 which is assailed by the Revenue. The relevant extract which is common in these group of cases is extracted

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S. MILESTONE DEVELOPERS,, SURAT

In the result, all the Nine Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above table at page 1 & 2 filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2961/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c).” 6. Relying on the said para the ld.CIT-DR inviting our attention to the impugned order submitted that relief has been granted by the CIT(A) for the reasons set out in para 7 to 7.2 which is assailed by the Revenue. The relevant extract which is common in these group of cases is extracted

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT vs. M/S. AASTHA ENTERPRISE,, SURAT

In the result, all the Four Appeals of various assessee’s as listed

ITA 2089/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meenas. आ.अ.सं./I.T.A अपीलाथ" Appellant Vs ""यथ"/Respondent No . No. & िनधा"रण वष" /A Y:

Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

6. up the points for arriving at his conclusion on which heavy reliance is laced by the Revenue. The relevant extract is reproduced hereunder : “Thus, the following points emerge as regards to the penalty proceedings : 1. The assessee has failed to give any justification or acceptable explanation against charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income; 2. In the penalty proceedings

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT vs. M/S. AASTHA CORPORATION,, SURAT

In the result, all the Four Appeals of various assessee’s as listed

ITA 2087/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meenas. आ.अ.सं./I.T.A अपीलाथ" Appellant Vs ""यथ"/Respondent No . No. & िनधा"रण वष" /A Y:

Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

6. up the points for arriving at his conclusion on which heavy reliance is laced by the Revenue. The relevant extract is reproduced hereunder : “Thus, the following points emerge as regards to the penalty proceedings : 1. The assessee has failed to give any justification or acceptable explanation against charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income; 2. In the penalty proceedings

THE ITO, WARD-2(3)(1),, SURAT vs. M/S. AASTHA ECO HOMES,, SURAT

In the result, all the Four Appeals of various assessee’s as listed

ITA 2088/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meenas. आ.अ.सं./I.T.A अपीलाथ" Appellant Vs ""यथ"/Respondent No . No. & िनधा"रण वष" /A Y:

Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

6. up the points for arriving at his conclusion on which heavy reliance is laced by the Revenue. The relevant extract is reproduced hereunder : “Thus, the following points emerge as regards to the penalty proceedings : 1. The assessee has failed to give any justification or acceptable explanation against charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income; 2. In the penalty proceedings

THE ITO, WARD-2(3)(1),, SURAT vs. M/S. AASTHA DEVELOPERS,, SURAT

In the result, all the Four Appeals of various assessee’s as listed

ITA 2086/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meenas. आ.अ.सं./I.T.A अपीलाथ" Appellant Vs ""यथ"/Respondent No . No. & िनधा"रण वष" /A Y:

Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

6. up the points for arriving at his conclusion on which heavy reliance is laced by the Revenue. The relevant extract is reproduced hereunder : “Thus, the following points emerge as regards to the penalty proceedings : 1. The assessee has failed to give any justification or acceptable explanation against charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income; 2. In the penalty proceedings

THE ITO, WARD-1,, BARDOLI vs. M/S. RAM CORPORATION,, SURAT

In the result, all the Ten Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above

ITA 3225/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

6 3218/Ahd/2016 The Income Tax Officer, V Balaji Enterprise, Ward-2(2)(4), Surat. s Angan Residency, Satellite A.Y. 2013-14 . Road, Sudama Chowk, Mota Varachha, Majura Gate, Surat. [PAN: AALFB 0125 A] 7 3219/Ahd/2016 The Income Tax Officer, V Gangotri Corporation, Ward-2(3)(5), Surat. s 238/A, Aavishkar Height, A.Y. 2013-14 . Ultran Road, Surat. [PAN: AALFG

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(3),,, SURAT vs. M/S. ASTHA DEVELOPERS,, SURAT

In the result, all the Ten Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above

ITA 3176/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2012-13
Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

6 3218/Ahd/2016 The Income Tax Officer, V Balaji Enterprise, Ward-2(2)(4), Surat. s Angan Residency, Satellite A.Y. 2013-14 . Road, Sudama Chowk, Mota Varachha, Majura Gate, Surat. [PAN: AALFB 0125 A] 7 3219/Ahd/2016 The Income Tax Officer, V Gangotri Corporation, Ward-2(3)(5), Surat. s 238/A, Aavishkar Height, A.Y. 2013-14 . Ultran Road, Surat. [PAN: AALFG

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT vs. M/S. SHREE SAI DEVELOPERS,, SURAT

In the result, all the Ten Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above

ITA 3175/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2012-13
Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

6 3218/Ahd/2016 The Income Tax Officer, V Balaji Enterprise, Ward-2(2)(4), Surat. s Angan Residency, Satellite A.Y. 2013-14 . Road, Sudama Chowk, Mota Varachha, Majura Gate, Surat. [PAN: AALFB 0125 A] 7 3219/Ahd/2016 The Income Tax Officer, V Gangotri Corporation, Ward-2(3)(5), Surat. s 238/A, Aavishkar Height, A.Y. 2013-14 . Ultran Road, Surat. [PAN: AALFG

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT vs. M/S. ANJANI DEVELOPERS,, SURAT

In the result, all the Ten Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above

ITA 3186/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

6 3218/Ahd/2016 The Income Tax Officer, V Balaji Enterprise, Ward-2(2)(4), Surat. s Angan Residency, Satellite A.Y. 2013-14 . Road, Sudama Chowk, Mota Varachha, Majura Gate, Surat. [PAN: AALFB 0125 A] 7 3219/Ahd/2016 The Income Tax Officer, V Gangotri Corporation, Ward-2(3)(5), Surat. s 238/A, Aavishkar Height, A.Y. 2013-14 . Ultran Road, Surat. [PAN: AALFG

THE ITO, WARD-2(3)(4),, SURAT vs. M/S. SHUBH CORPORATION,, SURAT

In the result, all the Ten Appeals of various assessee’s as listed above

ITA 3221/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

6 3218/Ahd/2016 The Income Tax Officer, V Balaji Enterprise, Ward-2(2)(4), Surat. s Angan Residency, Satellite A.Y. 2013-14 . Road, Sudama Chowk, Mota Varachha, Majura Gate, Surat. [PAN: AALFB 0125 A] 7 3219/Ahd/2016 The Income Tax Officer, V Gangotri Corporation, Ward-2(3)(5), Surat. s 238/A, Aavishkar Height, A.Y. 2013-14 . Ultran Road, Surat. [PAN: AALFG