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.

49 results for “section 68”+ Section 115Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai32Delhi5Chandigarh3Chennai2Kolkata2Pune1Bangalore1Hyderabad1Jaipur1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 115J70Addition to Income30Section 14A28Section 143(3)25Section 115B18Section 4417Disallowance17Section 1013Section 10(34)11Section 28

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR 1(3)(1), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. SKATE TRADES AND AGENCIES PRIVATE LIMITED , RAICHUR STREET MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1663/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhaildy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(3)(1), Room No.535, Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. Road, Churchgate ............... Appellant Mumbai - 400020

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

115B or section 115BB or section 115BBB or section 115E or section 164 or section 164A or section 167B, as the case may be, or the rate or rates of income-tax specified in this behalf in the Finance Act of the relevant year, whichever is applicable ; (ii) for the purposes of deduction

Showing 1–20 of 49 · Page 1 of 3

10
Deduction7
Exemption7

SPECTRA EQUIPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1),, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 500/HYD/2023[Assessment Year 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Dec 2024

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaassessment Year: 2017-18 Spectra Equipment Private Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan No.Aaccs8677C. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Akanksha, C.A. For Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Narmada, Cit-Dr For Shri Madan Mohan Meena, Sr.D.R. Date Of Hearing: 11.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.12.2024

For Appellant: Ms. Akanksha, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Narmada, CIT-DR for Shri Madan Mohan Meena
Section 115BSection 131Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

115B or section 115BB or section 115BBB or section 115E or section 164 or section 164A or section 167B, as the case may be, or the rate or rates of income-tax specified in this behalf in the Finance Act of the relevant year, whichever is applicable ; (ii) for the purposes of deduction

MAX NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 541/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishimax New York Life Insurance Vs. Dcit, Company Ltd, Circle-1, Ltu, New Delhi Plot No. 90A, Sector-18, Udyog Vihar, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu S. Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Parmita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 10(34)Section 115BSection 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 44Section 72Section 80G

68. We noted that Section 44 of the Act start with a non-obstante clause and overriding other provisions of the Act, provides for profits and gains from life insurance business to be computed in accordance with the rules contained in the First Schedule to the Act. As per rule 2 of the First Schedule to the Act, profits

SHARAD SHAMRAO SAWANT ,SANGLI vs. ASSESTANT COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2626/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Umeshkumar M. MaliFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

68, 69, 69A to 69D and levy of higher rate of tax u/s 115BBE, following factors are required to be considered–  Whether nature of income is clearly explained during the survey or during assessment proceedings.  Whether income can be classified under a particular head of income based on nature so as to demonstrate that it is flowing from

M/S. AYM SYNTEX LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. WELSPUN SYNTEX LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT -CENT CIR-3(4) , MUMBAI

ITA 2341/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asst. Cit Cc-3(3), Central Range-3, M/S Aym Syntex Ltd., Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Air India 9Th Floor Trade World, Senapati Building, Nariman Point, Vs. Bapat Marg, Kmala Mills Mumbai-400021. Compound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400011. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent

Section 14A

115B of the Act. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the decision. Once the accounts of the assessee have been prepared in decision. Once

ACIT- CC -3, MUMBAI vs. AYM SYNTEX LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 2549/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asst. Cit Cc-3(3), Central Range-3, M/S Aym Syntex Ltd., Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Air India 9Th Floor Trade World, Senapati Building, Nariman Point, Vs. Bapat Marg, Kmala Mills Mumbai-400021. Compound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400011. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent

Section 14A

115B of the Act. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the decision. Once the accounts of the assessee have been prepared in decision. Once

AYM SYNTEX LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. WELSPUN SYNTEX LTD.),MUMBAI vs. DCIT- CC- 3(4), MUMBAI

ITA 2342/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asst. Cit Cc-3(3), Central Range-3, M/S Aym Syntex Ltd., Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Air India 9Th Floor Trade World, Senapati Building, Nariman Point, Vs. Bapat Marg, Kmala Mills Mumbai-400021. Compound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400011. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent

Section 14A

115B of the Act. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the decision. Once the accounts of the assessee have been prepared in decision. Once

AYM SYNTEX LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. WELSPUN SYNTEX LTD.),MUMBAI vs. DCIT- CC- 3(3), MUMBAI

ITA 2340/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asst. Cit Cc-3(3), Central Range-3, M/S Aym Syntex Ltd., Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Air India 9Th Floor Trade World, Senapati Building, Nariman Point, Vs. Bapat Marg, Kmala Mills Mumbai-400021. Compound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400011. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent

Section 14A

115B of the Act. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the decision. Once the accounts of the assessee have been prepared in decision. Once

ACIT CENT. CIR 3(3) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. AYM SYNTEX LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 2550/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asst. Cit Cc-3(3), Central Range-3, M/S Aym Syntex Ltd., Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Air India 9Th Floor Trade World, Senapati Building, Nariman Point, Vs. Bapat Marg, Kmala Mills Mumbai-400021. Compound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400011. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent

Section 14A

115B of the Act. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the Court has been examined and no such intent is visible in the decision. Once the accounts of the assessee have been prepared in decision. Once

GENERAL REINSURANCE AG,COLOGNE, GERMANY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE - 2(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 4691/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2021-22
Section 144C(5)Section 9(1)(i)

115B of the Act.\n15. Without prejudice to Ground No. 1, 12, 13 and 14 above, the learned AO has\non the facts and circumstances of the case, erred in levying tax at the rate of 40\nper cent on profits computed in accordance with the provisions of section 115.JB\nof the Act.\n16. Without prejudice to Ground

ACIT, CIRCLE-14(1)(1), MUMBAIQ vs. M/S KOTAK MAHINDRA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismis

ITA 2449/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Acit-14(1)(1), M/S. Kotak Mahindra Life Room No. 432, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Insurance Company Ltd Bhavan, M.K.Road Vs. 2Nd Floor, 12 Bkc, Mumbai-400020. Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai-400 051 Pan No. Aaaco3983B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Madhur Agrawal, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, Cit Dr : Date Of Hearing 23/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/11/2022

For Appellant: Shri. Madhur Agrawal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, CIT DR
Section 14A

68,393/-. 3. On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed the On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed the On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed the appeal. 4. Aggrieved, the Revenue is Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by in appeal before the Tribunal

GENERAL REINSURANCE AG,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATONAL TAXATION)-RANGE 2(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2448/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2019-20
Section 144C(5)Section 9(1)(i)

115B of the Act.\n15. Without prejudice to Ground No. 1, 12, 13 and 14 above, the learned AO has\non the facts and circumstances of the case, erred in levying tax at the rate of 40\nper cent on profits computed in accordance with the provisions of section 115JB\nof the Act.\n16. Without prejudice to Ground

ICICI PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 6(1), MUMBAI

ITA 384/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 384/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Ms. Arati Vissanji, ARFor Respondent: Shri Awangshi Gimson
Section 10Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 44

115B.” 68 I.T.A. No. 384 & 632/Mum/2015 ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Ltd 6.2 Following the earlier order of this Tribunal we do not find any error or illegality in the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) and decide this issue against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. 7. Ground No.8 is regarding the claim of 100% depreciation

PNB METLIFE INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. PR. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 756/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri. K. P. Kumar, Senior CounselFor Respondent: Shri. G. R. Reddy, CIT – DR-I
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 263Section 27ASection 44

Section 115B of the Act, income from insurance business was required to be taxed at 12.5%, whereas balance of the total income was to be taxed at normal rates. As per the CIT, profits and gains of life-insurance business had to be carved out of the total income of the assessee which was not done

ASIRVAD MICRO FINANCE LIMITED,ANNA SALAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE -1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1141/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1141/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2017-18 Asirvad Micro Finance Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of Income No.9 Ninth Floor, Club House Road, Tax, Anna Salai, Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai- 600 002. Chennai. [Pan: Aagca5275J] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri P.R.Prasanna Varma, F.C.A & Mr.Arjun Rajagopalan, C.A, प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.Bipin C.N, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.08.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Prasanna Varma, F.C.A &For Respondent: Mr.Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 115BSection 69A

115B of Rs. 51,12,21,007/- was filed on 31.10.2017. The Ld.AO noted that the assessee had through its securitization activity earned interest on loan (Microfinance) of Rs.334,37,28,960/-. From the impugned amount the assessee was found to have reduced an amount of Rs.28,99,56,987/- so as to offer interest on microfinance loans amounting

GENERAL REINSURANCE AG,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATONAL TAXATION)-RANGE 2(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed

ITA 887/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2020-21
Section 144C(5)Section 9(1)(i)

115B of the Act.\n15. Without prejudice to Ground No. 1, 12, 13 and 14 above, the learned AO has\non the facts and circumstances of the case, erred in levying tax at the rate of 40\nper cent on profits computed in accordance with the provisions of section 115JB\nof the Act.\n16. Without prejudice to Ground

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA ,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CIRCLE 3(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3709/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 156

Section 115B of the Income-tax Act, 1961.” Brief facts of the case are as under: 2. The assessee is a Corporation established under the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956, filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 27.11.2014, declaring total income of Rs. 25,036,12,03,246/-. The return was processed

JINDAL ITF LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 13(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 7245/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year: 2015-16

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

68,161/- allowed as expenditure by AO would go on to increase the book loss. The learned CIT(A) has reduced disallowance u/s 14A from 21,15,14,527/- to RS 382/- i.e., to the extent of dividend received by the appellant on the basis of jurisdictional High Court decision both under normal provision and under section 115JB computation

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI vs. FIXIT PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 2833/CHNY/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jun 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P.George

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr.N.Gopikrishna, JCIT
Section 10Section 115J

68,564 : 2,79,910 -------------- -------------- Assessed Book Profit : 9,66,375 -------------- 7. Share of loss from the two firms were debited by the assessee in its Profit & Loss A/c and the profit shown in the P&L A/c was after these debits. What can be added to the profit as shown in the Profit & Loss A/c and what

LNG SECURITIES SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3708/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jul 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: : Shri C.M. Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. V.V. Kale, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Yogesh Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 234A

68,88,013/- under the normal provisions and at Rs.85,96,677/- under the special provisions of the Act. Scrutiny of income tax assessment revealed that the assessee claimed an expenditure of Rs.9,54,626/- on account of ‘loss on sale of investment’. The expenditure being capital in nature should have been disallowed. The mistake resulted in under assessment