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.

37 results for “section 68”+ Section 195(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,096Mumbai898Karnataka460Bangalore368Chennai289Kolkata200Ahmedabad187Jaipur154Chandigarh105Hyderabad101Raipur69Pune60Calcutta51Indore45Telangana38Surat37Visakhapatnam37Nagpur33Lucknow29Cochin25Rajkot22Cuttack15Guwahati15Dehradun11SC10Allahabad9Jodhpur8Agra7Orissa4Rajasthan4Amritsar4Jabalpur4Patna2Panaji2Ranchi1Uttarakhand1Varanasi1Andhra Pradesh1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 153A48Addition to Income26Section 14824Section 14722Section 143(3)21Section 13220Section 143(2)17Section 142(1)17Survey u/s 133A

HERMON EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 347/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 68

Section 68 does not need any introduction. To summarise, it taxes any credit appearing in the books of an assessee, where the assessee is not able to or not satisfactorily able to explain the nature and source of 10 ITA.No.347/VIZ./2024 such credit. It is a deeming fiction, which taxes a credit as income on unsatisfactory explanation about

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT. LTD, GUNTUR

Showing 1–20 of 37 · Page 1 of 2

10
Section 1279
Deduction6
Disallowance6
ITA 229/VIZ/2025[2020]Status: Disposed
ITAT Visakhapatnam
15 Sept 2025
Section 132Section 133ASection 147Section 148

6\nITA Nos. 228, 229, 230 & 231/VIZ/2025\nC.O. Nos. 19, 20, 21 & 22/VIZ/2025\nVenkatrama Poultries Pvt Ltd., 552\nthrough promoters. Ld. AO found that the assessee could not substantiate why\nthere is a difference between total sales as found in ERP data base and the books\nof accounts and therefore treated the same as unaccounted sales. Ld. AO\ntherefore arrived

GVA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 138/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Dec 2025AY 2016-17
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

6\nI.T.A.Nos.137, 138 & 139/VIZ/2025\nI.T.A.Nos.221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited\naccommodation entries is nothing but money laundering activity, which isa\npunishable offence under PMLA.\n11.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in allowing relief to the assessee, keeping\nin view of the fact that the assessee company had reduced its taxable profits, by\navailing

GVA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 137/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Dec 2025AY 2015-16
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

6\nI.T.A.Nos.137, 138 & 139/VIZ/2025\nI.T.A.Nos.221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited --\naccommodation entries is nothing but money laundering activity, which isa\npunishable offence under PMLA.\n11.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in allowing relief to the assessee, keeping\nin view of the fact that the assessee company had reduced its taxable profits, by\navailing

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GVA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DHAMTARI

ITA 221/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Dec 2025AY 2015-16
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

6\nI.T.A.Nos. 137, 138 & 139/VIZ/2025\nI.T.A.Nos.221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited --\naccommodation entries is nothing but money laundering activity, which isa\npunishable offence under PMLA.\n11.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in allowing relief to the assessee, keeping\nin view of the fact that the assessee company had reduced its taxable profits, by\navailing

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GVA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DHAMTARI

ITA 223/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

6\nI.T.A.Nos.137, 138 & 139/VIZ/2025\nI.T.A.Nos.221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited --\naccommodation entries is nothing but money laundering activity, which isa\npunishable offence under PMLA.\n11.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in allowing relief to the assessee, keeping\nin view of the fact that the assessee company had reduced its taxable profits, by\navailing

THE ARYAPURAM CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ACIT,, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes; and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 173/VIZ/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal – CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 43Section 43B

195) We extract below the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in this regard: “The Tribunal also referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd.’s case (supra) in support of their view. In that case, the Electricity Act provided for creating a reserve for the customers, in case the profit

THE ARYAPURAM CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.,,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes; and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 177/VIZ/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal – CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 43Section 43B

195) We extract below the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in this regard: “The Tribunal also referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd.’s case (supra) in support of their view. In that case, the Electricity Act provided for creating a reserve for the customers, in case the profit

THE ACIT,CIRCLE - 1,, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. M/STHE ARYAPURAM CO-OPRATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.,, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes; and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 195/VIZ/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal – CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 43Section 43B

195) We extract below the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in this regard: “The Tribunal also referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd.’s case (supra) in support of their view. In that case, the Electricity Act provided for creating a reserve for the customers, in case the profit

ARYAPURAM CO=OP. URBANK LTD.,,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ACIT,, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes; and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 517/VIZ/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal – CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 43Section 43B

195) We extract below the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in this regard: “The Tribunal also referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd.’s case (supra) in support of their view. In that case, the Electricity Act provided for creating a reserve for the customers, in case the profit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT LTD, GUNTUR

ITA 228/VIZ/2025[2019]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Sept 2025
Section 132Section 133ASection 147Section 148

6\nITA Nos. 228, 229, 230 & 231/VIZ/2025\nC.O. Nos. 19, 20, 21 & 22/VIZ/2025\nVenkatrama Poultries Pvt Ltd.,\nthrough promoters. Ld. AO found that the assessee could not substantiate why\nthere is a difference between total sales as found in ERP data base and the books\nof accounts and therefore treated the same as unaccounted sales. Ld. AO\ntherefore arrived

SMT. L SUDHA BALA, L/R OF LATE SRI L.NARSA REDDY,GUNTUR vs. THE DCIT, SPECIAL RANGE GUNTUR, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 261/VIZ/2012[1985-86]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Dec 2018AY 1985-86

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.260 & 261/Viz/2012 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years :1984-85 & 1985-86 Respectively) L.Sudha Bala Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of L/R Of Late Sri L Narasa Reddy Income Tax Prop.Sri Venkateswara Agro Chemicals Special Range Industries Guntur 2-14-101, Syamala Nagar 2Nd Lane, Guntur [Pan : Acgpl2351P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

6,18,000 As per the enquiries conducted by the AO the said purchased proved to be bogus, since, the letters addressed to them were returned unserved with remarks address not known. Enquiries conducted at the address mentioned revealed that no such concerns ever existed in the places mentioned therein. When this fact was put to the assessee, the assessee

SMT. L SUDHA BALA, L/R OF LATE SRI L.NARSA REDDY,GUNTUR vs. THE DCIT, SPECIAL RANGE GUNTUR, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 260/VIZ/2012[1984-85]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Dec 2018AY 1984-85

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.260 & 261/Viz/2012 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years :1984-85 & 1985-86 Respectively) L.Sudha Bala Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of L/R Of Late Sri L Narasa Reddy Income Tax Prop.Sri Venkateswara Agro Chemicals Special Range Industries Guntur 2-14-101, Syamala Nagar 2Nd Lane, Guntur [Pan : Acgpl2351P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

6,18,000 As per the enquiries conducted by the AO the said purchased proved to be bogus, since, the letters addressed to them were returned unserved with remarks address not known. Enquiries conducted at the address mentioned revealed that no such concerns ever existed in the places mentioned therein. When this fact was put to the assessee, the assessee

SIVA RAMA KRISHNA RAO NUTAKKI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 180/VIZ/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 234BSection 234C

68,93,262/- after claiming brokerage, indexed cost of acquisition and the cost of improvements on the said sale of immovable property and filed the return of income on 29/02/2020 admitting income of Rs. 6,72,20,240/- which includes interest income of Rs. 3,26,988/-. The return was processed by the CPC on 26/5/2020 and the assessee paid

GVA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 139/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

6\nI.T.A.Nos. 137, 138 & 139/VIZ/2025\nI.T.A.Nos.221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited\naccommodation entries is nothing but money laundering activity, which isa\npunishable offence under PMLA.\n11. The Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in allowing relief to the assessee, keeping\nin view of the fact that the assessee company had reduced its taxable profits, by\navailing

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GVA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DHAMTARI

ITA 222/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Dec 2025AY 2016-17
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

6\nI.T.A.Nos.137, 138 & 139/VIZ/2025\nI.T.A.Nos.221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited --\naccommodation entries is nothing but money laundering activity, which isa\npunishable offence under PMLA.\n11.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in allowing relief to the assessee, keeping\nin view of the fact that the assessee company had reduced its taxable profits, by\navailing

ARABOLU VENKATA NAGA DEEPATHI REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, N. SATYARAMANUJAMM ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed

ITA 178/VIZ/2018[2010-2011]Status: HeardITAT Visakhapatnam28 Mar 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.178/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2010-11) Smt.Arabolu Venkata Naga Deepthi Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. By Power Of Attorney Holder (International Taxation) Smt. N.Satyaramanujam Visakhapatnam Flat No.403, Dhanna Apartments Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Atcpa6413A] (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri I.Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Shri SPG Mudaliar, DR
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 195Section 201(1)Section 234ASection 54Section 54F

195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) on the payments made by him to the assessee. Subsequently, the assessee filed her income tax return for the A.Y.2010-11 on 17.05.2013 admitting sale consideration of Rs.39,69,000/-, towards her share on account of the above transfer of property and claimed exemption u/s 54F for the entire long term

VULLI RADHAKRISHNA,TUNI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TUNI

ITA 359/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.359/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vulli Radhakrishna, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Tuni. Ward-1, Pan: Aegpv1751H Tuni. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 04/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 19/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 17/03/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short “A.O.”) Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”) Dated 26/03/2022 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2 Vulli Radhakrishna Vs. Ito

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 69A

6. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in 5. sustaining the addition of Rs.3,76,565 made by the assessing officer towards unexplained purchase of equity shares. 7. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.1,68,552 made by the assessing officer by considering some alleged sale

M/S GROB-WERKE GMBH & CO. KG,GERMANY vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTL TXN CIRCLE, VIZAG, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 176/VIZ/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.176/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2022-23) Vs. M/S. Grob – Werke Gmbh & Co. Kg Acit Industriestrasse 4, 87719 Mindelheim International Taxation Circle Income Tax Office Germany, Pincode - 87719 Infinity Towers Sankaramatam Road [Pan:Aaifg4270G] Visakhapatnam - 530016 करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Nikhil Ajit Mutha, Ca : Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit(Dr) राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.09.2025

Section 115ASection 129Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 195

195 of the Act. The Ld. AO observed that the firm is a pass-through entity with M/s. GROB Verwaltungs GmbH as one of the partners being an Austrian resident as disclosed from the details of the ITR filed by the assessee. It was also submitted before the Ld. AO that Mr. Florian Grob a German resident partner holds

THE ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA vs. M/S. MULPURI FOODS AND FEDS PVT. LTD., NUZIVIDU

ITA 292/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Sept 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.292 /Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2012-2013) The Acit Vs. M/S Mulpuri Foods & Circle-3(1) Feeds Pvt. Ltd. Vijayawada No.3-93, Ramannagudem Vattigudipadu Post Nuzvid [Pan : Aagcm2045J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, DRFor Respondent: Shri G.V.N.Hari, AR
Section 68

195] and further held that the share 4 I.T.A. No.292 /Viz/2017 M/s Mulpuri Foods and Feeds Pvt. Ltd., Nuzvid application money cannot be taxed in the hands of the company and the AO is free to assess the same in the hands of the individuals. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the department carried the matter