Section 268A of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.373

Section 268A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 373 (Filing of appeal by income-tax authority) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 373 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 268A is Seth R. Dalmia v. CIT (110 ITR 644), cited in 40 of the 3,931 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 268A

Seth R. Dalmia v. CIT
110 ITR 644 · 1977 · Supreme Court
40
citing judgments

An indirect connection between expenditure and income can be sufficient to establish the required nexus for deductibility under Section 57(iii). The connection need not be direct.

Krishnanand Agnihotri v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
1 SCC 816 · 1977 · Supreme Court
38
citing judgments

The burden of proving a transaction to be benami, or that the apparent owner is not the real owner, rests strictly on the party asserting it, requiring definite evidence or circumstances that reasonably infer the fact, not mere suspicion.

CIT v. H.H. Maharani Vijaykuverba Saheb of Morvi
100 ITR 67 · 1975 · High Court
27
citing judgments

The connection between an expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct; an indirect connection can establish the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income earned for the purpose of Section 57(iii).

CIT v. Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria
319 ITR 413 · 2009 · High Court
27
citing judgments

Expenditure is deductible under Section 57(iii) if it has a proximate and relevant connection to the earning of income, even if the income arises as a by-product of other activities.

Ajay Sharma v. Dy. CIT
30 Taxmann.com 109 · 2013 · Reported
25
citing judgments

Where no undisclosed income or incriminating material is found during a search, penalty under section 271AAB cannot be imposed. Additions based on alleged receivables from seized papers require direct material to establish undeclared income.

CIT v. Jagmohandas J. Kapadia
61 ITR 663 · 1966 · High Court
25
citing judgments

Expenditure is deductible under section 57(iii) of the Income Tax Act only if it is incurred solely for the purpose of making or earning dividend income.

DCIT v. Manish Agarwal
92 Taxmann.com 81 · 2018 · Reported
19
citing judgments

Section 271AAB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, does not mandate the imposition of penalty in every case of default; the Assessing Officer retains discretion to levy or not levy a penalty, which must be exercised judiciously considering all relevant circumstances.

CIT v. Madhukar K Inamdar HUF
318 ITR 149 · 2009 · High Court
7
citing judgments
ITO v. Palak Chinubhai Patel
137 Taxmann.com 194 · 2022 · ITAT
4
citing judgments
81 Taxmann.com 245 (Pune Trib) 2. M/s Nippon Paint India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT
16 Taxmann.com 352 · 2011 · High Court
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 268A

ITO, Ward-1(5), Dhanbad vs. Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, Dhanbad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 24/RAN/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi26 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.24/Ran/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-2009) Ito, Ward-1(5), Dhanbad Vs. Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, Jealgora, Dhanbad स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aldps 8319 J (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.08/Ran/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.24/Ran/2019) नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-2009) Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(5), Dhanbad Jealgora, Dhanbad, स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aldps 8319 J (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl.Citdr निर्धाऩिती की ओर से /Assessee By : None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : The Revenue Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Dhanbad, Dated 10.10.2018 For The Assessment Year 2008-2009, Whereas The Assessee Has Filed Cross Objection. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Even The Case Was Called For Hearing On Second Round. Therefore, The Bench Decided To Dispose Off

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl.CITDR
Section 268A

ACIT, Circle-3, Ranchi vs. Sri Binoy Kumar Singh, Daltonganj

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 220/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi26 Aug 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.220/Ran/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2015-2016) Acit, Circle-3, Ranchi Vs. Shri Binoy Kumar Singh, C/O Kamlesh Kumar Singh Hamidganj,Daltonganj, 822101 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Afzps 8151 C (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl.Citdr निर्धाऩिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv. सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi, Dated 07.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. 2. At The Outset, We Find That In The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue, The Tax Effect Is Less Than Rs.50 Lakhs And, Therefore, In View Of Cbdt Circular No.17/2019 Dated 8Th August, 2019, The Appeal Of The Revenue Is Not Maintainable. 3. Ld. Dr Also Fairly Conceded That No Doubt The Tax Effect Involved In The Appeal Is Less Than Rs.50 Lakhs, Thus, Bound By The Departmental

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl.CITDR
Section 268A

ACIT, Circle-1(1), Hazaribag vs. Sagar Enterprises, Chatra

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 211/RAN/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi26 Aug 2019AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.211/Ran/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2016-2017) Acit, Circle-1(1), Hazaribagh Vs. Sagar Enterprises, Bachra, Chatra-829201 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Achfs 0636 H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl.Citdr निर्धाऩिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Dinesh Ch. Agarwal,Adv सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Hazaribagh, Dated 04.02.2019 For The Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. At The Outset, We Find That In The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue, The Tax Effect Is Less Than Rs.50 Lakhs And, Therefore, In View Of Cbdt Circular No.17/2019 Dated 8Th August, 2019, The Appeal Of The Revenue Is Not Maintainable. 3. Ld. Dr Also Fairly Conceded That No Doubt The Tax Effect Involved In The Appeal Is Less Than Rs.50 Lakhs, Thus, Bound By The Departmental Instruction, However, Ld. Dr Drew Our Attention To Para 10 Of The Circular

For Appellant: Dinesh Ch. Agarwal,AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl.CITDR
Section 268A

DCIT, Circle-2, Ranchi vs. Sri Pranav Kumar Singhdeo, Ranchi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 186/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi26 Aug 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.186/Ran/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2015-2016) Dcit, Circle-2, Ranchi Vs. Sri Pranav Kumar Singhdeo Circular Road, Lalpur, Ranchi स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aqops 4256 J (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl.Citdr निर्धाऩिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv. सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi, Dated 29.01.2019 For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. 2. At The Outset, We Find That In The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue, The Tax Effect Is Less Than Rs.50 Lakhs And, Therefore, In View Of Cbdt Circular No.17/2019 Dated 8Th August, 2019, The Appeal Of The Revenue Is Not Maintainable. 3. Ld. Dr Also Fairly Conceded That No Doubt The Tax Effect Involved In The Appeal Is Less Than Rs.50 Lakhs, Thus, Bound By The Departmental

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl.CITDR
Section 268A