Section 68 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.102

Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 102 (Unexplained credits) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 102 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 68 is Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. (149 Taxmann.com 399), cited in 2,379 of the 29,931 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 68

Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd.
149 Taxmann.com 399 · 2023 · Supreme Court
2,379
citing judgments

An assessment under section 153A is without jurisdiction if there is an absence of incriminating material for an unabated assessment year.

Sumati Dayal v. CIT
214 ITR 801 · 1995 · Supreme Court
1,967
citing judgments

The Revenue is entitled to look behind the apparent form of a transaction to discover its true nature, applying the test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances. If transactions defy logic or are unnatural, they can be treated as bogus, even if supported by some documentation, especially in cases of cash credits or unexplained investments.

CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.
374 ITR 645 · 2015 · High Court
1,823
citing judgments

In Section 153A proceedings, the scope of assessment extends to abated proceedings, enabling an assessee to raise fresh legal claims that could have been made in regular assessment proceedings.

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
320 ITR 561 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,673
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

CIT v. Durga Prasad More
82 ITR 540 · 1971 · Supreme Court
1,579
citing judgments

Tax authorities must judge evidence using the test of human probabilities and consider the apparent as real until there are reasons to believe it is not. They can rely on circumstantial evidence and the preponderance of probabilities to determine the genuineness of transactions.

GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO
259 ITR 19 · 2003 · Supreme Court
1,349
citing judgments

When a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons for reopening upon the assessee's request and must dispose of the assessee's objections to the notice by passing a speaking order.

Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT
26 ITR 775 · 1954 · Supreme Court
1,061
citing judgments

Corroborative evidence is essential to support evidence found on third-party premises, and an assessment cannot be based on suspicion, surmises, or conjecture.

ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.
291 ITR 500 · 2007 · Supreme Court
1,030
citing judgments

For initiating reassessment proceedings under Section 147, the Assessing Officer needs only prima facie material providing a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or the sufficiency/correctness of the material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice under Section 148.

CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd.
159 ITR 78 · 1986 · Supreme Court
897
citing judgments

When an assessee provides the identity and address of a creditor or investor for a cash credit or share capital under Section 68, the burden shifts to the Department to establish lack of genuineness or creditworthiness, requiring it to conduct further inquiries; mere non-compliance by third parties to summons cannot be the sole basis for an adverse inference against the assessee.

Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO
236 ITR 34 · 1999 · Supreme Court
862
citing judgments

For reassessment proceedings under Section 148, the Assessing Officer only needs prima facie material to have a reason to believe income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or evaluation of the sufficiency and correctness of such material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice.

Judgments on Section 68

Income Tax Officer Ward 4(1), New Delhi vs. Baba Vishwakarma Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 2813/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalincome Tax Officer, Baba Vishwakarma Ward-4(1), Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi. Vs. G-3, Karampura, New Delhi-110015 Pan-Aabcb4897N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/10/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A), In Short] Dated 10.08.2023 In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-2/10110/2017-18 Arising Out Of Order Passed U/S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’) Dated 22.03.2016 For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is A Company & The Case Of The Assessee Was Taken Up For Scrutiny. During The Course Of Hearing, The Assessee Has Not Submitted The Requisite Details, Therefore, The Assessment Was Completed U/S 144 Of The Act By Making Addition Of Rs.2,35,50,000/- U/S 68 Of The Act. Against Such Order, The Assessee Filed An Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A), Who Vide Impugned Order Ito Vs. Baba Vishwakarma Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd. Dated 10.08.2023 Allowed The Appeal Of The Assessee & Deleted The Additions Made By Ao. Against The Said Order, The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal By Taking Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 144Section 68

Sita Ram Pansari, Transport Nagar Kuju vs. Income Tax Officer, Ramgarh Cantt

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 126/RAN/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am (Through Hybrid Mode) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.123-126/Ran/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Ayrs :2013-14, 2014-2015, 2015-16 & 2017-18) Sita Ram Pansari, Vs. Ito Ramgarh Transport Nagar, Main Road, Kuju, Jharkhand-825316 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Ajppp 3351 H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Akash Agarwal, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Khubchand T Pandya Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm : All The Above Captioned Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders, All Dated 20.02.2024 Passed By Ld.Cit(A), Patna-3, Against Which The Assessee Preferred Appeals Before The Tribunal. 2. Since The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Common Except The Figures & Assessment Years In Question, Therefore, All The Four Appeals Are Heard Together & Decided By This Common Order. 3. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.123/Ran/2025 For A.Y.2013-2014. 4. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Engaged In The Business Or Profession Of Coal Trading Under E-Auction

For Appellant: Shri Akash Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Khubchand T Pandya Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Sita Ram Pansari, Transport Nagar Kuju vs. Income Tax Officer, Ramgarh Cantt

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 125/RAN/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am (Through Hybrid Mode) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.123-126/Ran/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Ayrs :2013-14, 2014-2015, 2015-16 & 2017-18) Sita Ram Pansari, Vs. Ito Ramgarh Transport Nagar, Main Road, Kuju, Jharkhand-825316 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Ajppp 3351 H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Akash Agarwal, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Khubchand T Pandya Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm : All The Above Captioned Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders, All Dated 20.02.2024 Passed By Ld.Cit(A), Patna-3, Against Which The Assessee Preferred Appeals Before The Tribunal. 2. Since The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Common Except The Figures & Assessment Years In Question, Therefore, All The Four Appeals Are Heard Together & Decided By This Common Order. 3. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.123/Ran/2025 For A.Y.2013-2014. 4. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Engaged In The Business Or Profession Of Coal Trading Under E-Auction

For Appellant: Shri Akash Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Khubchand T Pandya Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Sita Ram Pansari, Transport Nagar Kuju vs. Income Tax Officer, Ramgarh

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 124/RAN/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am (Through Hybrid Mode) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.123-126/Ran/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Ayrs :2013-14, 2014-2015, 2015-16 & 2017-18) Sita Ram Pansari, Vs. Ito Ramgarh Transport Nagar, Main Road, Kuju, Jharkhand-825316 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Ajppp 3351 H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Akash Agarwal, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Khubchand T Pandya Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm : All The Above Captioned Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders, All Dated 20.02.2024 Passed By Ld.Cit(A), Patna-3, Against Which The Assessee Preferred Appeals Before The Tribunal. 2. Since The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Common Except The Figures & Assessment Years In Question, Therefore, All The Four Appeals Are Heard Together & Decided By This Common Order. 3. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.123/Ran/2025 For A.Y.2013-2014. 4. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Engaged In The Business Or Profession Of Coal Trading Under E-Auction

For Appellant: Shri Akash Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Khubchand T Pandya Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Sita Ram Pansari, Transport Nagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ramgarh

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 123/RAN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am (Through Hybrid Mode) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.123-126/Ran/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Ayrs :2013-14, 2014-2015, 2015-16 & 2017-18) Sita Ram Pansari, Vs. Ito Ramgarh Transport Nagar, Main Road, Kuju, Jharkhand-825316 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Ajppp 3351 H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Akash Agarwal, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Khubchand T Pandya Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm : All The Above Captioned Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders, All Dated 20.02.2024 Passed By Ld.Cit(A), Patna-3, Against Which The Assessee Preferred Appeals Before The Tribunal. 2. Since The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Common Except The Figures & Assessment Years In Question, Therefore, All The Four Appeals Are Heard Together & Decided By This Common Order. 3. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.123/Ran/2025 For A.Y.2013-2014. 4. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Engaged In The Business Or Profession Of Coal Trading Under E-Auction

For Appellant: Shri Akash Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Khubchand T Pandya Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68