← All Phrases

“Section 36(1)(ii)”

Section References (mined)Section 36Section 36(1)(ii)167 judgments

THE KARNATAKA STATE COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT BANK LIMITED ,BANGLAORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BENGALURU

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

ITA 1821/BANG/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Apr 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Bhardwaj Sheshadri, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Subramanian, JCIT (DR)
Section 250Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

fund for Rs. 3,12,323/- was deposited after due date and therefore the same was proposed to bring to tax as per section 36(1)(ii) of the Act. In absence of any reply from the assessee, the sum of Rs. 3,12,323/- was treated as income

DCIT, CENTRAL -4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJESH AUTO MERCHANDISE PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2610/KOL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2026AY 2021-22
Section 131Section 132Section 153ASection 68

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA\nBEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM\nAND\nSHRI PRADIP KUMAR

INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI vs. AVIGNA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2930/CHNY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Feb 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2930/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Year: 2023-24

For Appellant: Mr. M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक

V. M. SALGAOCAR AND BROTHER PRIVATE LIMITED,VASCO vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

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

ITA 83/PAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. No.83/Pan/2024 (A.Y.2021-22 ) V M Salgaocar & Brother Vs Cpc, Private Limited, Bengaluru-560500. . P.B.No.14, Salgaocar House, Karnataka Dr.F.L.Gomes Road, Vasco De Gama, Goa-403802, Pan .No.Aaacv5950B (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI

BAJAJ CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2676/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Ms. Srushti ChawdaFor Respondent: 17/12/2025
Section 14A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-I NOIDA, NOIDA vs. M/S RUDRA BUILDWELL HOMES PVT. LTD., DELHI

Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal taken by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4119/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwaldy. Cit, M/S Rudra Buildwell Homes Central Circle-I, Private Limited, Noida-201301, Vs. D-53, Okhla, Phase-1, Uttar Pradesh. Delhi-110020. Pan-Aafcr6959P (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Cit, M/S Rudra Buildwell Projects Central Circle-I, Private Limited, Noida-201301, Vs. D-53, Okhla, Phase-1, Uttar Pradesh. Delhi-110020. Pan-Aaecr9589E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

allowance or deduction claimed by assessee in respect of loss, expenditure or trading liability incurred, however, assessee had not claimed deduction under section 36(1)(ii) for interest on loan and loan was obtained for acquiring capital assets, hence, waiver was on account of liability other than trading liability

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. NUTRICRAFT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 298/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CA
Section 143(3)Section 148ASection 153CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 36(1)(ii)Section 40

whether there were any extra services for payment of huge remuneration rendered by the Directors thus making it fall under exceptions as per section 36(1)(ii) for it to be eligible for deduction. d. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT ... found that assessee has paid a remuneration to its director amounting to ₹ 11,39,00,000/- which is hit by the provisions of section 36 (1) (ii) of the act, so he disallowed the excess amount compared to earlier years holding that :- Page 6 of 18 “4. Disallowance of Bonus

THE CHODAVARAM CO OPERATIVE SUGARS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 543/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: the Ld.AO. The Ld.AO after perusing the details furnished by the assessee observed that the assessee has paid bonus amount of Rs.1,27,03,496/- during the F.Y.2017-18 on various dates from April 2017 to September 2017. The Ld.AO observed that generally, bonus is declared during Diwali season and paid accordingly and therefore, concluded that the bonus amount of Rs.1,27,03,490 does not pertain to the impugned assessment year and therefore disallowed the same.

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69C

such sum was incurred as aforesaid and the evidence of such payment is furnished by the assessee along with such return. Further, section 36(1)(ii) reads as below. 36. (1) The deductions provided for in the following clauses shall be allowed in respect of the matters dealt with therein

RADHANAGAR COLD STORES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 9(3), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 777/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 777/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Radhanagar Cold Stores Pvt. Limited,...……Appellant 161, Rajakatra Building, 1St Floor, Netaji Subha Road, Burrabazar, Kolkata-700007 [Pan:Aabcr5647N] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-9(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Palash Chttopadhyay, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Susanta Saha, Sr. D.R., Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 04, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 20, 2025 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 36(1)(ii)

both on facts and in law in sustaining the action of the Assessing Officer in making a disallowance of Rs.4,54,966/- under section 36(1)(ii) of the Act, being bonus paid to the staff of the company by holding that such payments are in lieu of dividend ... both on facts and in law in sustaining the action of the Assessing Officer in mistakenly concluded that the deduction claimed does revoke section 36(1)(ii) of the Act considering the 3CA report has been wrongfully mentioned as Rs.3,08,839/- as bonus paid to the employees without considering

GOURAV BHARGAVA,BHOPAL vs. ADDL/JCIT(A)-1 DELHI, DELHI

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 235/IND/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Nov 2025AY 2023-24
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 253(5)Section 43B

{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, इंदौर न्यायपीठ, इंदौर\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nINDORE BENCH, INDORE\nBEFORE SHRI B.M

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LADHURAM TOSHNIWAL AND SONS ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, allthe appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1661/KOL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LADHURAM TOSHNIWAL AND SONS ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, allthe appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1660/KOL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LADHURAM TOSHNIWAL AND SONS ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, allthe appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1659/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LADHURAM TOSHNIWAL AND SONS ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, allthe appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1658/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LADHURAM TOSHNIWAL AND SONS ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, allthe appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1657/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LADHURAM TOSHNIWAL AND SONS ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, allthe appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1656/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CC 3(4), MUMBAI vs. PASHA FINANCE PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4317/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Devendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(ii)Section 36(1)(iii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CC 3(4), MUMBAI vs. PASHA FINANCE PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4316/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Devendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(ii)Section 36(1)(iii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT

SHARADA ELECTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. PCIT, PUNE-3, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1432/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

DCIT, CC-7(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. PATANJALI FOODS LTD.,( FORMERLY KNOWN AS RUCHI SOYA INDUSTRIES LTD,, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1174/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 37(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Showing 1–20 of 167 · Page 1 of 9

...