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.

32 results for “disallowance”+ Section 133(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,274Delhi933Kolkata282Ahmedabad227Jaipur220Bangalore215Chennai170Surat106Indore105Chandigarh100Pune100Hyderabad94Raipur85Cochin75Rajkot58Visakhapatnam51Lucknow37Guwahati37Nagpur36Agra32Amritsar27Allahabad25Cuttack25Patna20SC16Ranchi16Dehradun10Jodhpur6Jabalpur4Panaji2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Varanasi1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)55Addition to Income29Section 37(1)25Section 14819Bogus Purchases19Section 14718Natural Justice17Section 6816Section 26315Section 153A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA vs. ALNOOR EXPORTS, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 273/AGR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 Feb 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: \nShri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

disallowance made in the assessment.\nPage | 4\n6. The Assessee filed another written submission dated 26-02-2018 before the Id CITA stating that the time provided to the parties for responding to the notice under section 133(6

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA vs. ALNOOR EXPORTS, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 274/AGR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2

14
Section 14514
Reassessment10
03 Feb 2025
AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

disallowance made in the assessment. ITA Nos. 273 & 274/AGR/2024 Alnoor Exports 6. The Assessee filed another written submission dated 26-02-2018 before the ld CITA stating that the time provided to the parties for responding to the notice under section 133

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, AGRA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2019-20 is\nallowed and appeals filed by the Revenue in AYs 2021-22, 2022-23 and\n2023-24 are dismissed

ITA 302/AGR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2022-23
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

133(6) to M/s\nElahi Trading Co., which reply has been reproduced by\nthe AO at pages 6 to 7 of the assessment order, in which,\nhe has stated he has supplied 'live buffaloes' and had not\nsold any boneless meat to HMA Agro Industries Limited.\nThe assessee had relied upon his reply to show cause\nnotice

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, MORENA vs. SHRI AGRASEN LOGISTICS, JOTAI ROAD, PORSA,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 108/AGR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Agra24 Jun 2025AY 2022-23
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

133(6) of the Act. However the AO\nchoose a simple way to rely on the surmises & suspicion and treated the entire unsecured\nloan as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Act.\n5.5 It is to be noted that the assessee firm accepted to have received unsecured loan,\nprovided name, PAN, confirmation and bank account statement of the creditors

HARDAYAL MILK PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SHIKOHABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), FIROZABAD, FIROZABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 344/AGR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 68

disallowance of depreciation claimed on fixed assets. In first appeal preferred against the above said assessment order dated 31.03.2016, learned CIT(A) vide order dated 25.06.2025 affirmed the rejection of accounts and sustained the addition made by AO on account of low profit rate. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal in ITA No.342/Agr/2025 before the ITAT, which has been partly allowed

HARDAYAL MILK PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SHIKOHABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), FIROZABAD, FIROZABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 343/AGR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 68

disallowance of depreciation claimed on fixed assets. In first appeal preferred against the above said assessment order dated 31.03.2016, learned CIT(A) vide order dated 25.06.2025 affirmed the rejection of accounts and sustained the addition made by AO on account of low profit rate. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal in ITA No.342/Agr/2025 before the ITAT, which has been partly allowed

ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AGRA, SANJAY PLACE vs. MAMTA AGARWAL, BHAGWATI INTERNATIONAL

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 399/AGR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Feb 2025AY 2014-15
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

133(6) of the Act stood served on him but the party are chosen not to respond for which the assessee cannot be faulted. The Id NFAC took due cognizance of the fact that the assessee had submitted the computation of income along with copy of ITR, audited financial statement, copy of VAT duly declaring the entire purchase and sums

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED, AGRA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2019-20 is\nallowed and appeals filed by the Revenue in AYs 2021-22, 2022-23 and\n2023-24 are dismissed

ITA 300/AGR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

133(6) to M/s\nElahi Trading Co., which reply has been reproduced by\nthe AO at pages 6 to 7 of the assessment order, in which,\nhe has stated he has supplied 'live buffaloes' and had not\nsold any boneless meat to HMA Agro Industries Limited.\nThe assessee had relied upon his reply to show cause\nnotice

HARI OM AGARWAL,KOLARAS vs. ITO SHIVPURI, ASHOK NAGAR

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

ITA 91/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 37

6) of Section 250 of the Income Tax Act. 8. That the AO has erred on facts and in law while making the addition by disallowing of the expenses(by estimate) out of the expenses claimed under the Head ‘general administration and selling expenses’ , claimed as per provisions of Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, no disallowance is called

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 301/AGR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

133(6) to M/s Elahi Trading Co., which reply has been reproduced by 31 ITA No.251/Agr/2025 and 4 ors. the AO at pages 6 to 7 of the assessment order, in which, he has stated he has supplied ‘live buffaloes’ and had not sold any boneless meat to HMA Agro Industries Limited. The assessee had relied upon his reply

HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,AGRA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 251/AGR/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

133(6) to M/s Elahi Trading Co., which reply has been reproduced by 31 ITA No.251/Agr/2025 and 4 ors. the AO at pages 6 to 7 of the assessment order, in which, he has stated he has supplied ‘live buffaloes’ and had not sold any boneless meat to HMA Agro Industries Limited. The assessee had relied upon his reply

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 303/AGR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

133(6) to M/s Elahi Trading Co., which reply has been reproduced by 31 ITA No.251/Agr/2025 and 4 ors. the AO at pages 6 to 7 of the assessment order, in which, he has stated he has supplied ‘live buffaloes’ and had not sold any boneless meat to HMA Agro Industries Limited. The assessee had relied upon his reply

ASSTT. COMMISSIOENER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AGRA, SANJAY PLACE AGRA vs. MAMTA AGARWAL, BHAGWATI INTERNATIONAL

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 398/AGR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Feb 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: \nShri Amol Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: \nShri Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

133(6) of the Act stood served on him but the party\nare chosen not to respond for which the assessee cannot be faulted. The Id\nNFAC took due cognizance of the fact that the assessee had submitted the\ncomputation of income along with copy of ITR, audited financial statement,\ncopy of VAT duly declaring the entire purchase and sums

SH. YUGAL KISHOR AGARWAL,AGRA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4(3)(1), ETAH

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3/AGR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 57

133(6)(PB /Page 3) seeking information/evidences about the sources of transactions towards purchase of shares to the tune of Rs. 1,37,45,896/- alongwith bank statement and copy of ITR along with all annexures viz. P&L Account, Balance Sheet , Audit Report etc. It was submitted that the assessee duly explained before the AO vide reply dated

SUMIT KUMAR,AGRA vs. ITO 1(1)(2), AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 155/AGR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Sumit Kumar, Vs. Ito, Village Rampura, Ward-1(1)(2), Gwalior Road, Agra Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Buqpk7461L Assessee By : Shri Gaurav Agarwal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(3)

section 133(6) of the Act. The Assessee had also submitted that those parties were not having taxable Sumit Kumar income and hence had not filed their income tax returns. Despite all these explanations and documentary evidences, the Learned AO proceeded to disallow

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AGRA vs. MAHESH EDIBLE OIL INDUSTRIES LTD, DELHI

ITA 157/AGR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 Apr 2025AY 2013-14
Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 145Section 153ASection 37(1)

133(6) to these\nsuppliers remained un-responded. In such a case, no adverse inference\ncould be drawn against the assessee considering the ratio of decision of\nHon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishinchand Chellaram vs. CIT\n(125 ITR 713) wherein it was held that the onus would be on revenue to\nprove its allegation. However, there

SATISH PRAKASH AGARWAL,AGRA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2)(1), AGRA, AGRA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 113/AGR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

133(6) to 11 lenders out of which only 5 lenders responded to the enquiries made by the AO. The AO based on the analysis of the enquiry observed that the creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness of the interest could not be proved. The observations of the AO are recorded in the assessment order. The assessee even

ANUPAM MITTAL,AGRA vs. ITO WARD 2(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA

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

ITA 233/AGR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 is hereby confirmed and the ground no. 1,2 and 6 are decided in negative and against the appellant.” 4.1. Similarly, the ld. CIT(A) also confirmed the disallowance of interest of Rs.2,40,000/- on the loan of Rs.71,08,000/- by observing in para no.5.1 and 5.2 as under

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AGRA vs. MAHESH EDIBLE OIL INDUSTRIES LTD, DELHI

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 161/AGR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.113/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.114/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.115/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.116/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.117/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 6. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.118/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 7. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.119/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S Mahesh Edible Oil Industries Ltd. Acit-Central Circle बनाम/ 3/14-A, Jungpura-B Agra. Vs. New Delhi – 110 014. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccm-7102-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 8. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.157/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) &

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Gupta (Adv.), Sh. SomilFor Respondent: Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 145Section 153ASection 37(1)

6. We also find that the fact that no incriminating material was found qua these purchases has already been accepted by Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order which has already been elaborated by us in preceding para 3.4. The Ld. CIT(A) concurred that the findings of search in assessee’s case were based on detailed findings of search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AGRA vs. MAHESH EDIBLE OIL INDUSTRIES LTD, DELHI

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 160/AGR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.113/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.114/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.115/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.116/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.117/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 6. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.118/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 7. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.119/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S Mahesh Edible Oil Industries Ltd. Acit-Central Circle बनाम/ 3/14-A, Jungpura-B Agra. Vs. New Delhi – 110 014. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccm-7102-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 8. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.157/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) &

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Gupta (Adv.), Sh. SomilFor Respondent: Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 145Section 153ASection 37(1)

6. We also find that the fact that no incriminating material was found qua these purchases has already been accepted by Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order which has already been elaborated by us in preceding para 3.4. The Ld. CIT(A) concurred that the findings of search in assessee’s case were based on detailed findings of search