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.

36 results for “section 68”+ Section 88Eclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai17Kolkata8Ahmedabad7Delhi4

Key Topics

Section 88E50Section 143(3)42Section 115J28Section 14A25Disallowance21Section 15420Addition to Income14Section 26311Section 13310Deduction9Section 271(1)(c)8Short Term Capital Gains8

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - II vs. M/S MBL & Co. LTD

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/1181/2011HC Delhi17 May 2013
For Appellant: Mr N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing CounselFor Respondent: Mr Salil Aggarwal, Mr Ajay Wadhwa and
Section 115JSection 260ASection 87Section 88E

88E of the Act would not be available against the tax as computed under Section 115JB of the Act. The Tribunal held that Section 87 of the Act did not differentiate between the total income computed under the regular provisions or as calculated under Section 115JB of the Act. Section 115JB only provides for an alternative

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - II vs. M/S MBL & Co. LTD

The appeal is dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 36 · Page 1 of 2

ITA/573/2012HC Delhi17 May 2013
For Appellant: Mr N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing CounselFor Respondent: Mr Salil Aggarwal, Mr Ajay Wadhwa and
Section 115JSection 260ASection 87Section 88E

88E of the Act would not be available against the tax as computed under Section 115JB of the Act. The Tribunal held that Section 87 of the Act did not differentiate between the total income computed under the regular provisions or as calculated under Section 115JB of the Act. Section 115JB only provides for an alternative

PRAKASH SECURITIES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2624/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 2624/Mum/2017 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri Devendra Jain, ARs’For Respondent: Shri Somnath M. Wagale, DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2(10)Section 88E

section 88E of ₹ 30,93,497/- as claimed. It is observed from the record that your income during the financial year 2007-08 consisted of following: Income from share treading 93,51,369 Interest income 2,44,256 Interest income 26,68

MADHAV STOCK VISION P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 4(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 581/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Apr 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 88ESection 88E(2)

68,713/- which was claimed only to the extent of tax on the income of the assessee other than the short term capital gain. Thus, the Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee while computing the income for the year suo-moto restricted the rebate under section 88E

ACIT 2(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. ICICI BANK LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3445/MUM/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Dcit – Circle – 2(3)(2) Vs. M/S. Icici Bank Ltd., R.No.552, 5Th Floor Icici Bank Towers Aayakar Bhavan South East Wing 9Th M.K.Road, Floor, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No.Aaaci1195H (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 88Section 88E

section 88E was allowable for the assessment year under consideration. Therefore, this had resulted into wrong grant of rebate of Rs. 1,99,16,051/- u/s. 88E of the Act. Thereafter, AO passed order u/s.154 so as to disallow the rebate granted u/s.88 E amounting to Rs.1,99,68

DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI vs. ICICI BANK LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

ITA 4158/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 10(15)Section 115JSection 234BSection 41(4)Section 88ESection 90

88E 7,08,99,317 8 Short grant of relief under section 90 4,67,30,903 9 Charging of interest under section 234B & 234D 10 (10.1 & 10.2) Provisions of section 115JB not applicable 11 General Revenue Ground No. Item of disallowance / addition Amount – Rs. 1 & 2 Depreciation on leased assets 43,43,25,891 2 Addition

ICICI BANK LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG (1), MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

ITA 4248/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 10(15)Section 115JSection 234BSection 41(4)Section 88ESection 90

88E 7,08,99,317 8 Short grant of relief under section 90 4,67,30,903 9 Charging of interest under section 234B & 234D 10 (10.1 & 10.2) Provisions of section 115JB not applicable 11 General Revenue Ground No. Item of disallowance / addition Amount – Rs. 1 & 2 Depreciation on leased assets 43,43,25,891 2 Addition

DCIT 8(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. VINAMRA UNIVERSAL TRADERS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 2018/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain Dy. C.I.T. – 8(3)(2) M/S. Vinamra Universal Room No. 615, 6Th Floor Traders Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Jai Centre, 1St Floor Mumbai 400020 34, P. D’Mello Rd., Opp. Red Gate Mumbai 400009 Pan – Aaccv5090J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. S. Padmaja & Shri S.K. PodarFor Respondent: Shri Vijaya Mehta & Shri Govind Javeri
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 94(7)

88E of the Act. During the assessment proceedings, the A.O. noticed that the assessee had received a dividend of Rs.47,16,889/- from Indian Companies and Mutual Funds. The A.O. asked the assessee to furnish the details of the purchase and sale in respect of companies which were hit by the provisions of section

GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1,, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 116/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

section 88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. (Rs.in) Asstt.Year Amount added back to Amount added the total income back in the total income in previous Asstt.Year 2005-06 Rs.31,565/- Rs.6,02,99,64/- 2006-07 Rs.NIL Rs.31,565/- 2007-08 Rs.27,58,400/- - 2008-09 Rs.10,19,61,651/- Rs.27

GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 117/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

section 88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. (Rs.in) Asstt.Year Amount added back to Amount added the total income back in the total income in previous Asstt.Year 2005-06 Rs.31,565/- Rs.6,02,99,64/- 2006-07 Rs.NIL Rs.31,565/- 2007-08 Rs.27,58,400/- - 2008-09 Rs.10,19,61,651/- Rs.27

GUJARAT FLUOROCHEMEICALS LTD,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 135/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

section 88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. (Rs.in) Asstt.Year Amount added back to Amount added the total income back in the total income in previous Asstt.Year 2005-06 Rs.31,565/- Rs.6,02,99,64/- 2006-07 Rs.NIL Rs.31,565/- 2007-08 Rs.27,58,400/- - 2008-09 Rs.10,19,61,651/- Rs.27

GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2365/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

section 88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. (Rs.in) Asstt.Year Amount added back to Amount added the total income back in the total income in previous Asstt.Year 2005-06 Rs.31,565/- Rs.6,02,99,64/- 2006-07 Rs.NIL Rs.31,565/- 2007-08 Rs.27,58,400/- - 2008-09 Rs.10,19,61,651/- Rs.27

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA vs. GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LTD.,, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2546/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

section 88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. (Rs.in) Asstt.Year Amount added back to Amount added the total income back in the total income in previous Asstt.Year 2005-06 Rs.31,565/- Rs.6,02,99,64/- 2006-07 Rs.NIL Rs.31,565/- 2007-08 Rs.27,58,400/- - 2008-09 Rs.10,19,61,651/- Rs.27

THA ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1,, BARODA vs. M/S. GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LIMITED.,, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 106/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

section 88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. (Rs.in) Asstt.Year Amount added back to Amount added the total income back in the total income in previous Asstt.Year 2005-06 Rs.31,565/- Rs.6,02,99,64/- 2006-07 Rs.NIL Rs.31,565/- 2007-08 Rs.27,58,400/- - 2008-09 Rs.10,19,61,651/- Rs.27

THE ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1, BARODA vs. GUJARAT FLUOROCHEMEICALS LTD, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 548/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

section 88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. (Rs.in) Asstt.Year Amount added back to Amount added the total income back in the total income in previous Asstt.Year 2005-06 Rs.31,565/- Rs.6,02,99,64/- 2006-07 Rs.NIL Rs.31,565/- 2007-08 Rs.27,58,400/- - 2008-09 Rs.10,19,61,651/- Rs.27

ITO, WARD - 56(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. PKS HOLDINGS, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1677/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 1677/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2007-08 I.T.O., Ward-56(2) -Vs.- M/S. Pks .Holdings Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaifp7778G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Jcit, Sr.Dr For The Respondent : Shri A.K.Updhay, Ar

For Appellant: Smt. Ranu Biswas, JCIT, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Updhay, AR
Section 88E

section 88E, on value of transaction entered into by him in a recognised stock exchange, shall be in furnished in Form No. 10DB and shall be verified in the manner indicated therein. As per the content of form 10DB the sale value of the transaction was Rs., 99,25,12,859/- on which STT of Rs.1,68

MAHALAXMI INNOVATIVE SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in light our aforesaid observations

ITA 4856/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 4856/Mum/2011 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Mahalaxmi Innovative Services Ltd. Dcit Cir 2(2) बिधम/ 1004, 10Th Floor, Maker Chambers-V, Mumbai Nariman Point Vs. Mumbai, स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcm9810C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Reepal Tralshwala (AR)For Respondent: Shri T.A. Khan (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

68,85,369/-. The case of the assessee was thereafter taken up for scrutiny proceedings under Sec. 143(2) of the ‘Act’. That during the course of the assessment proceedings the A.O. observed that the assessee had P a g e | 3 claimed to have earned ‘Short term capital gain’ (STCG) of Rs.3,51,72,757/- and ‘Long term capital

MANTOR CAPITAL LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 196/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Cc 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita Nos. 194 To 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 To 2011-2012) Vs. Acit, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Cc -22 Press Journal Rd. Mumbai – 4000020 Nariman Pt. Mumbai- 400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P. Singh, Cit Dr ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. N. R. Suresh, Ar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The A.Y.2010-2011 & The Appeals Filed By Assessee For Assessment Years 2008-2009 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Order Passed U/S 143(3)/143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T. Act.

For Appellant: Mr. N. R. Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 3

68 holding that since the assessee itself has admitted certain receipts form the above parties as genuine, the explanation as now offered cannot be accepted. 3. During the course of hearing of the appeal, it was submitted by the appellant that the AO has brought to tax a sum of Rs. 19.40 crores received as share capital ignoring the evidence

ACIT CC 3(3) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. MENTOR CAPITAL LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7408/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Cc 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita Nos. 194 To 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 To 2011-2012) Vs. Acit, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Cc -22 Press Journal Rd. Mumbai – 4000020 Nariman Pt. Mumbai- 400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P. Singh, Cit Dr ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. N. R. Suresh, Ar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The A.Y.2010-2011 & The Appeals Filed By Assessee For Assessment Years 2008-2009 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Order Passed U/S 143(3)/143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T. Act.

For Appellant: Mr. N. R. Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 3

68 holding that since the assessee itself has admitted certain receipts form the above parties as genuine, the explanation as now offered cannot be accepted. 3. During the course of hearing of the appeal, it was submitted by the appellant that the AO has brought to tax a sum of Rs. 19.40 crores received as share capital ignoring the evidence

MENTOR CAPITAL LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7512/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Cc 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita Nos. 194 To 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 To 2011-2012) Vs. Acit, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Cc -22 Press Journal Rd. Mumbai – 4000020 Nariman Pt. Mumbai- 400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P. Singh, Cit Dr ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. N. R. Suresh, Ar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The A.Y.2010-2011 & The Appeals Filed By Assessee For Assessment Years 2008-2009 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Order Passed U/S 143(3)/143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T. Act.

For Appellant: Mr. N. R. Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 3

68 holding that since the assessee itself has admitted certain receipts form the above parties as genuine, the explanation as now offered cannot be accepted. 3. During the course of hearing of the appeal, it was submitted by the appellant that the AO has brought to tax a sum of Rs. 19.40 crores received as share capital ignoring the evidence