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.

12 results for “disallowance”+ Section 220(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,022Mumbai937Bangalore294Chennai285Kolkata218Ahmedabad169Jaipur163Hyderabad113Pune102Indore90Chandigarh89Cochin80Raipur63Lucknow41Panaji37Guwahati31Surat27Nagpur24Rajkot23Patna22Visakhapatnam21Allahabad19Cuttack16Karnataka15Agra12Amritsar11Ranchi9SC8Kerala8Jodhpur7Telangana4Dehradun3Rajasthan2Varanasi1Orissa1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 2(22)(e)17Addition to Income10Disallowance5Section 684Cash Deposit4Section 693Section 40A(2)(b)3Deduction3Deemed Dividend3Section 250

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S PREM MOTORS PVT LTD., GWALIOR

The appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 327/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 Nov 2017AY 2010-11
Section 2(22)(e)Section 22Section 40A(2)(b)

220 Taxman 327 (Raj. HC) ACIT Vs Britto Amusement P. Ltd (2014) 360 ITR 544 (Bom. HC) CIT Vs Hotel Hilltop – 313 ITR 116 (Raj) CIT Vs Universal Medicare P. Ltd. 324 ITR 263 (Mum) 5.3.3 I am also of the view that the dividend even under section 2(22)(e) can be taxed only in the hands

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

The Ao.

2
Section 1482
Section 143(3)2
Bench:
Section 2(22)(e)

220 Taxman 327(Raj.)(HC) ACIT.v. Britto Amusement P. Ltd. (2014) 360ITR 544 (Bom)(HC) CIT Vs Hotel Hilltop 313 ITR 116 (Raj) ClT Vs Universal Medicare P Ltd 324ITR 263 (Mum) 5.1.3 In view of the view, I am of the opinion that the dividend even under section 2(22)(e) of the Act can be taxed only

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)

220 Taxman 327(Raj.)(HC) ACIT.v. Britto Amusement P. Ltd. (2014) 360ITR 544 (Bom)(HC) CIT Vs Hotel Hilltop 313 ITR 116 (Raj) ClT Vs Universal Medicare P Ltd 324ITR 263 (Mum) 5.1.3 In view of the view, I am of the opinion that the dividend even under section 2(22)(e) of the Act can be taxed only

A.C.I.T.-2, AGRA vs. SMT. NEETA SHARMA PROP., AGRA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 286/AGR/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 234ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(3)Section 46A

220) (vi) [2017] 88 taxmann.com 506 (Gujarat High Court) CIT vs. Patel Proteins (P) Ltd. (Para 2 Pg. 222) (vii) [2013] 40 taxmann.com 177 (Gujarat High Court) CIT, Ahmedabad vs. Riddhi Steel and Tube (P) Ltd. (Para 9.2 Pg. 230) (viii) [2011] 12 taxmann.com 411 (Punjab & Haryana HC) CIT, Ludhiana vs. Santosh Box Factory (P) Ltd. (Para 2

SMT. NEETA SHARMA,AGRA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, AGRA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 299/AGR/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 234ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(3)Section 46A

220) (vi) [2017] 88 taxmann.com 506 (Gujarat High Court) CIT vs. Patel Proteins (P) Ltd. (Para 2 Pg. 222) (vii) [2013] 40 taxmann.com 177 (Gujarat High Court) CIT, Ahmedabad vs. Riddhi Steel and Tube (P) Ltd. (Para 9.2 Pg. 230) (viii) [2011] 12 taxmann.com 411 (Punjab & Haryana HC) CIT, Ludhiana vs. Santosh Box Factory (P) Ltd. (Para 2

SH SANJAY BANSAL ,MORENA vs. A.C.I.T (CENTRAL), GWALIOR

In the result, assessee's appeal is dismissed

ITA 31/AGR/2022[2012 - 13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Apr 2025

Bench: learned CIT(Appeals) who has very exhaustively passed the impugned order in 60 pages and considered all the submissions of the assessee in the tabulated form and otherwise, which need not to be repeated again for the sake of brevity. However, learned CIT(Appeals) partly allowed assessee's appeal confirming the addition only to the extent of Rs.71,44,045/- as against addition of Rs.91,06,669/-. 4. Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on the following grounds : "1.Because in any view, th

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

disallowed as per the provisions of section 40A(3) rw.r. 6DD of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The appellant Submitted that following purchases have been made in cash from the Cultivators of agricultural products and therefore, these payments are allowable as per the provisions of section 40A(3A) r.w.r. 6DD(e) 7| Page produce was purchased grower producer is placed

SHRI PUNEET BANGLA,AGRA vs. ITO 1(3), AGRA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 141/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 36Section 57

disallowed by the AO as well as the ld. CIT(A). 8. Heard. A reading of the order under appeal, at first blush, does not evince this factual position, as contended by the assessee, to have been so shown before the Authorities below. However, we have been taken through the copies of the documents certified to have been furnished before

SHRI SWAMI RAM SWAROOP SHARMA,MATHURA vs. ITO WARD 3(4), MATHURA

In the result, both the appeals are treated as allowed, for statistical purposes

ITA 16/AGR/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra09 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenakapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Revenue) (Assessee) Kapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Assessee) (Revenue)

2. The Department would have no objection to the above request. 3. Accordingly, in terms of Rule 26 of the ITAT Rules, 1963, this request is accepted. Necessary changes in the record be made, as such. This appeal has been filed against the CIT(A)’s order dated 18.01.2013, 4. deciding the appeal an ex parte qua the assessee, partly

SHRI SWAMI RAM SWAROOP SHARMA,MATHURA vs. ITO WARD-3(4), MATHURA

In the result, both the appeals are treated as allowed, for statistical purposes

ITA 146/AGR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra09 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenakapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Revenue) (Assessee) Kapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Assessee) (Revenue)

2. The Department would have no objection to the above request. 3. Accordingly, in terms of Rule 26 of the ITAT Rules, 1963, this request is accepted. Necessary changes in the record be made, as such. This appeal has been filed against the CIT(A)’s order dated 18.01.2013, 4. deciding the appeal an ex parte qua the assessee, partly

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

220 (Agra) which was cited by the AO, held that where assessee received loans from six persons. Assessing Officer noted that Immediately before amount were lent to assessee, identical amounts were deposited in bank accounts of sald persons. Assessee could produce only one lender for examination. Assessing Officer found that lenders had no creditworthiness as they had very small bank

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

VERMA SERVICE STATION,FIROZABAD vs. ACIT, FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 212/AGR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 68

disallowed interest of Rs.2,85,984/- and Rs.1,83,248/- for which, it was stated that the authorized representative of the assessee conceded. I.T.A No. 212/Agra/2018 3 3. In the first round of appeal, ITAT, Agra Bench, Agra Vide ITA No. 189/Agra/2011 dated 12.08.2015 has restored the matter back to AO holding that since the additions are based