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.

8 results for “disallowance”+ Section 150clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,409Delhi1,156Bangalore519Chennai467Ahmedabad304Jaipur292Kolkata280Pune200Hyderabad186Indore130Chandigarh121Surat112Cochin104Raipur68Allahabad63Visakhapatnam54Lucknow51Rajkot50Cuttack46Amritsar45Calcutta37Karnataka37Guwahati35Nagpur35Ranchi18Patna11SC10Jodhpur10Panaji9Agra8Varanasi7Jabalpur7Dehradun5Telangana3Kerala2Rajasthan2Punjab & Haryana2

Key Topics

Section 2(22)(e)12Section 143(1)7Addition to Income7Section 1475Section 695Disallowance5Section 2634Section 403Survey u/s 133A2Deemed Dividend

DIXIT RICE MILL ,AURAIYA vs. DCIT, BENGALURU

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

ITA 373/AGR/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra10 Jan 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 143(1)Section 246Section 246ASection 36

disallowed under section 36. 6. It is seen that in the various grounds taken by the assessee he is trying to argue case by filing evidences as is done during scrutiny assessments and not u/s143(1) under centralized computerized processing. In view of the procedures that exist for computerized processing, assessee is advised to first file a rectification application online

M/S R.K. BAJPAI,AURAIYA vs. CIT -1, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

2
ITA 154/AGR/2016[2008-09]Status: Disposed
ITAT Agra
16 May 2018
AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenam/S R.K. Bajpai, Vs..Dcit,Circle-1, Dibiyapur, Auraiya. Agra. Panno.Aaffr8521G (Assessee) (Revenue)

Section 194CSection 263Section 40Section 40a

150/- as legal expense and no TDS has been made as per the provisions of Section 1941 and 194J of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Whereas, these payments have been made to different persons and no single payment or aggregate of payments made to a single person is outside the limit prescribed u/s 1941 and 194J of the Income

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1), GWALIOR vs. ROYAL AUTOMOBILES P LTD, GWALIOR

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

ITA 121/AGR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: The Ao.

Section 2(22)(e)

150/- which has been added by the AO on account disallowances of keyman insurance policy, during the relevant financial year, in spite of the facts on records that the assessee has failed to produce any admissible evidence during the course of assessment proceeding before the AO.” 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1), GWALIOR vs. ROYAL AUTOMOBILES P LTD, GWALIOR

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

ITA 122/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: The Ao.

Section 2(22)(e)

150/- which has been added by the AO on account disallowances of keyman insurance policy, during the relevant financial year, in spite of the facts on records that the assessee has failed to produce any admissible evidence during the course of assessment proceeding before the AO.” 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

SHYAMA SHYAM INFRADEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AGRA vs. ITO 2(1)(2), AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 503/AGR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshshyama Shyam Vs. Ito, Infradevelopers Pvt Ltd, Ward-2(1)(2), Khasra No. 961, Bhahistabad, Agra Sikandra, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aatcs9899R Assessee By : Shri Gaurav Agarwal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

150/-. During the course of re-assessment proceedings, the assessee furnished the following documents on the following dates before the ld AO: – Sl No. Date of Details of submission submission 1 17-01-2023 Acknowledgement, Reply to notice, ITR, Computation of Total Income, sale deeds, Audit Report, P&L account, Balance sheet. 2. 22-04-2023 Acknowledgement, Reply to notice

SMT. GARIMA MEHTA,GWALIOR vs. I.T.O., WARD-1(2), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 343/AGR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 10ASection 69

disallowed the assessee’s claim u/s 10A on the basis that the 21. assessee did not fulfill the conditions contained in section 10A. It was observed that the business premises of the assessee was not situated either in a Software Technology Park, or in a Special Category Zone, as required by the provisions of section 10A(1) (A); that

DY C.I.T.-3, MATHURA vs. M/S KOSHDA BUILDCON PVT. LTD., MATHURA

In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue stands allowed for

ITA 315/AGR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra27 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2014-15]

Section 143(3)

section 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 is as per law and addition of Rs.5,17,61,420/-made by applying the Percentage Completion method is justified. 4. That the appellant craves leaves to add or delete or alter or modify any one or more ground (s) of appeal during the appellate proceedings. 5. That the order

M/S ESCO MARUTI BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,,AGRA vs. J.C.I.T., RANGE-4, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 280/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 133ASection 68

section 133A of the Act was conducted at its business premises on 15.03.2011, wherein, the survey party had found and impounded certain incriminating documents. One such impounded document is marked as Annexure- 4, which is a ledger, and as per details recorded therein, it was found that the assessee had received cash advances amounting to Rs.8,00,02,000/- from