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.

14,313 results for “section 68”+ Cash Depositclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi3,435 Mumbai2,805 Kolkata929 Chennai868 Ahmedabad842 Jaipur775 Bangalore724 Hyderabad586 Pune374 Chandigarh371 Indore308 Surat303 Rajkot234 Visakhapatnam223 Cochin207 Nagpur145 Raipur140 Lucknow131 Amritsar122 Karnataka121 Cuttack89 Agra79 Patna65 Jodhpur61 Allahabad61 Guwahati59 Calcutta48 Panaji48 Jabalpur33 Dehradun32 Telangana27 Varanasi23 Ranchi18 SC14 Rajasthan6 Orissa2 Punjab & Haryana2 Gauhati2 Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 68123 Addition to Income85 Section 14758 Section 143(3)40 Cash Deposit36 Section 25032 Section 69A27 Section 14827 Section 153A26 Section 263

RAKESH JAIN,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 546/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Section 115Section 144Section 145Section 156Section 250Section 274Section 68

68, read with section 153A, of\nthe Income-tax Act, 1961 Cash credit\n(Unexplained cash deposits) - Assessment\nyear 2017-18 Certain

ASHISH BHARGAVA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 14,313 · Page 1 of 716

...

24

Unexplained Cash Credit22

Demonetization21

ITA 875/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vinok Kumar Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT

Section 115BSection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68

68 are not applicable in the present case, since the cash deposits, in question, have been duly explained as arising from recorded cash sales and opening cash balance. Therefore, since provision of Section

SUWALKA AND SUWALKA PROPERTIES AND BUILDERS PVT LTD,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, KOTA, KOTA, RAJASTHAN

ITA 302/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Him Challenging The 2 Suwalka & Suwalka Properties & Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Assessment Order Dated 22.12.2019 Passed U/S.143(3)Of The Income Tax

For Appellant: Sh. Vijay Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 115BSection 129Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68Section 69A

cash deposited in demonetized currency as arising out of unexplained sources and is to somehow trigger the provisions of section 115BBE read with section 68

BINA GOENKA THE JEWELLER LLP ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 25(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the a In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 737/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Bina Goenka The Jeweller Llp, Asst. Cit Circle-25(2), 501 Kings Apartments, Juhu 220, 2Nd Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 Between Jw Mariot & Tulip Vs. To C-43, G Block, Bandra Kurla Star, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400092. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aapfb 7501 C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Siddharth Kothari

deposits of unexplained cash credit unexplained cash credit in terms of section 68 of the A in terms of section

ACIT CC-14, DELHI vs. DELHI SPOT BULLION TRADING CO. PVT. LTD. , DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1965/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Anuj Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 68 was held to be not applicable to trade recovery made by the assessee during the year. In the present case, the cash deposited

ITO, NON CORPORATE WARD 1(4), , COIMBATORE vs. M/S SURABII GOLD , COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 372/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 372/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Income-Tax Officer, M/S. Surabii Gold, Non-Corporate Ward 1(4), V. 138, Karuppa Gounder Street, Aayakar Bhavan, K G Street, 63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore – 641 012. Coimbatore – 641 018. [Pan: Abufs-6503-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2024

For Appellant: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT

cash deposits u/s. 68 of the Act, in light of above factual background. 9. The provisions of section 68 deals

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1, COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE vs. MS DAR PARADISE PVT. LTD., COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1106/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1106/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Dar Paradise Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, V. 599, Raja Street, Corporate Circle -1, Coimbatore – 641 001. Coimbatore. [Pan: Aafcd-3066-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Ca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, CA

Section 115JSection 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)

deposits. Further, there is a fundamental difference between cash credit and cash receipts towards sales. If assessee claims certain cash credits in its books of accounts and not able to explain credits to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, then said cash credits need to be examined in light of provisions of section 68

JCIT SPL. RANGE-12, NEW DELHI vs. ARIHANTA INDUSTRIES, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 963/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR

Section 131Section 68Section 801CSection 80I

68,000 SALES AND TECH. 12/16/2013 5.50.000 PENTAL STEEL INDIA - FUNDS TRF. FUNDS TRF. 12/16/2013 13,50,000 CASH SHIFTED TO ARIHANTA IND. ON 16-12-2013 - CASH SHIFTED TO ARIHANTA IND. ON AKSHRA SALES- FUNDS TRF. 12/16/2013 6,00,000 RTGS - Rs. 24,79,050 VAANI TRADING CO.- FUNDS TRF. FUNDS TRF. IMPERIAL TRADERS- FUNDS TRF. FUNDS TRF. 1/20/2014

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S KUNDAN JEWELLERS PVT LTD , MUMBAI.

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1035/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaledcit, Circle – 2(1)(1) Vs. M/S. Kundan Jewellers Room No. 561, 5Th Floor Pvt Ltd Aayakar Bhavan, Mk 223, Sm Patil Bldg, Sv Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400058. Pan/Gir No. : Aabck5770H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Nihar Ranjan Samal.Dr Respondent By : Mr.Siddharth Kothari.Ar Date Of Hearing 19.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 29 .05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Cit(A), Delhi Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Mr.Nihar Ranjan Samal.DRFor Respondent: Mr.Siddharth Kothari.AR

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

68 without appreciating the fact that the appellant had submitted all the documentary evidences such as sale register, cash sale memos, Stock statement, audited cashbook and bank statement Indicating the source of Cash Deposited. Hence all the condition relating to section

SHRI RAJ KUMAR ( M/S RADHIKA SALES CORP ), AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 3 (3), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 195/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250oSection 68

68 on account of cash deposited by assessee in its two bank account post demonetization, since said cash 141 (Bangalore - deposit was towards assessee's sale proceeds which was already offered to tax by assessee and admitted by revenue Trib) Anantpur as revenue receipt, impugned addition made under section

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , JAIPUR vs. MAHENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 172/JPR/2022[ABUPK2500L]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2022

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Khejrolia (CA)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl. CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

section 145(3) of the Act. (vii) It is also observed that the AO has treated the cash deposited in the banks during the demonetization period in demonetized currency as unexplained cash credits u/s 68

ALKA KHANDAKA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1014/JPR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sauravh Harsh, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 68

deposited out of cash in hand available with the assessee. Entire cash in hand was duly recorded in the books of accounts; the source of cash was from sales made by the assessee out of stock-in-hand available with the assessee and thus there was no occasion to invoke section 68

DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI vs. BAWA JEWELLERS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 352/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.352/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 बनाम Dcit Bawa Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Circle 4(2) Vs. A-24, Tagore Market, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi. West, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacb4823D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

cash deposited during the demonetization period as arising out of unexplained sources(as against the accepted position in the past andthe subsequent periods) is to somehow trigger the provisions of section 115BBE read with section 68

SHREE DURGA JEWELLERS,JAWAHAR NAGAR JAIPUR vs. AO CIRCLE 4 JAIPUR, CR BUILDING JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 33/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Suhani Meharwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

section 68. Ld\nAO added Rs.7000000.00 on account of cash deposits on 11.11.20216. When the\nbooks are maintained and cash

RUBY SINGH ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the seven captioned appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 2878/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accoutant Member

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151

cash credit under section 68 of the Act read with section 115BE of the Act. 6. That without prejudice to the above and in the alternative, even otherwise, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law and on facts in holding that amount deposited

RUBY SINGH ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the seven captioned appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 2876/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accoutant Member

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151

cash credit under section 68 of the Act read with section 115BE of the Act. 6. That without prejudice to the above and in the alternative, even otherwise, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law and on facts in holding that amount deposited

RUBY SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the seven captioned appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 2881/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accoutant Member

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151

cash credit under section 68 of the Act read with section 115BE of the Act. 6. That without prejudice to the above and in the alternative, even otherwise, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law and on facts in holding that amount deposited

RUBY SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the seven captioned appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 2879/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accoutant Member

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151

cash credit under section 68 of the Act read with section 115BE of the Act. 6. That without prejudice to the above and in the alternative, even otherwise, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law and on facts in holding that amount deposited

RUBY SINGH,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the seven captioned appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 2875/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accoutant Member

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151

cash credit under section 68 of the Act read with section 115BE of the Act. 6. That without prejudice to the above and in the alternative, even otherwise, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law and on facts in holding that amount deposited

RUBY SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the seven captioned appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 2877/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accoutant Member

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151

cash credit under section 68 of the Act read with section 115BE of the Act. 6. That without prejudice to the above and in the alternative, even otherwise, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law and on facts in holding that amount deposited