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.

1 result for “disallowance”+ Section 7clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai19,767Delhi15,661Chennai5,758Bangalore5,464Kolkata5,152Ahmedabad2,375Pune1,988Hyderabad1,586Jaipur1,356Surat975Indore872Chandigarh783Cochin632Karnataka590Rajkot563Raipur486Visakhapatnam476Nagpur444Lucknow408Amritsar335Cuttack317Jodhpur184Telangana178Panaji172Patna165Guwahati151Ranchi142SC132Dehradun127Agra120Calcutta105Allahabad87Kerala64Jabalpur62Punjab & Haryana33Varanasi33Orissa13Rajasthan11Himachal Pradesh8A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN7Gauhati2Uttarakhand2Andhra Pradesh1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Tripura1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1

COMMNR.,CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRAS vs. M/S. ADISON & CO. LTD

C.A. No.-007906-007906 - 2002Supreme Court29 Aug 2016

Bench: Us Because Of An Order Dated 16.07.2008, By Which There Was A Reference To A Larger Bench In View Of The Importance Of The Questions Involved. 2. Civil Appeal No. 7906 Of 2002 Arises From The Judgment Dated 23.11.2000 Passed By The Madras High Court In R.C. No. 01 Of 1999. Civil Appeal No. 14689 Of 2015 Was Filed By The Revenue Against The Judgment Dated 26.11.2014 In Central Excise Appeal No. 21 Of 2009. Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 18426 Of 2015, 18423 Of 2015, 18425 Of 2015, 23722 Of 2015, 12282 Of 2016, 16142 Of 2016 & 16141 Of 2016 Are Filed Against The Judgment Of The Andhra Pradesh High Court In Central Excise Appeal Nos. 21 Of 2005, 9 Of 2005, 51 Of 2004, 10 Of 2005, 44 Of 2004, 38 Of 2004 & 18 Of 2005 Respectively. 3. Civil Appeal No. 8488 Of 2009 Is Filed Against The Judgment Dated 20.08.2008 Passed By The Bombay High 2

Section 11Section 4

7 Page 8 JUDGMENT consumer had borne the burden of the duty. According to the High Court, Section 11-B of the Act cannot be construed as having reference to the ultimate Consumer and it would be sufficient for the claimant to show that he did not pass on the burden of duty to any other person. It was further