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.

4 results for “disallowance”+ Section 13(1)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,696Delhi3,624Chennai998Bangalore810Jaipur738Ahmedabad701Kolkata601Hyderabad536Pune375Chandigarh333Indore293Raipur283Surat232Visakhapatnam187Rajkot173Cochin170Amritsar165Nagpur155Lucknow125SC123Panaji83Jodhpur62Guwahati59Cuttack57Allahabad56Patna33Agra29Dehradun28Ranchi26Jabalpur13Varanasi8A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN4ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 80H7Section 11A4Section 44Deduction2Limitation/Time-bar2

JEYAR CONSULTANT & INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,MADRAS

C.A. No.-008912-008912 - 2003Supreme Court01 Apr 2015
Section 80H

13 of 24 Page 14 JUDGMENT under Section 3(c)(i), one necessarily has to reduce the profits under Section 3(c)(ii). Section 80-HHC makes it clear that in arriving at profits earned from export of both self-manufactured goods and trading goods, the profits and losses in both the trades have to be taken into consideration

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MYSORE vs. M/S. TVS MOTORS COMPANY LTD

C.A. No.-005155-005156 - 2007Supreme Court15 Dec 2015
Section 4Section 4(3)(d)

13. We may mention that the aforesaid circular was withdrawn vide another Circular dated 12.12.2002 issued by the Board taking note of the fact that the CESTAT had decided otherwise in the case of M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (supra), M/s. Hindustan Motors Ltd.10, and M/s. Escorts Tractors Ltd.11 and the appeals of the Department against the aforesaid decisions of CESTAT

M/S. PUROLATOR INDIA LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI-III

Appeal is disposed of accordingly

C.A. No.-001959-001959 - 2006Supreme Court25 Aug 2015
Section 11ASection 11A(1)Section 38ASection 4

13. Section 4, as it reads after the amendment of 2000, is as follows:- “4. Valuation of excisable goods for purposes of charging of duty of excise.- (1) Where under this Act, the duty of excise is chargeable on any excisable goods with reference to their value, then on each removal of the goods, such value shall

M/S. B.P.L. LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALICUT

C.A. No.-005523-005523 - 2004Supreme Court05 May 2015
Section 11A

disallowing the benefit of the notification to the Defibrillator thereby concurring with the view of the Technical Member. 11) This is how the matter has come up to this court in the form of present appeal filed by the appellant under Section 35 L(b) of the Civil Appeal Nos. 5523 & 6037 of 2004 Page 7 of 19 Page