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.

35 results for “disallowance”+ Section 234B(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,656Delhi1,571Bangalore1,025Ahmedabad327Kolkata210Jaipur183Chennai178Pune155Hyderabad149Indore71Nagpur63Chandigarh56Surat48Allahabad39Ranchi37Agra35Rajkot34Lucknow31Visakhapatnam21Karnataka20Jodhpur18Dehradun18Raipur15Cochin12Amritsar11Cuttack11Patna11SC5Jabalpur5Panaji3Guwahati2Varanasi1Telangana1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)48Addition to Income32Section 37(1)28Natural Justice21Section 14518Section 153A16Section 142A14Bogus Purchases14Section 87A10Section 234B

SMT. NEETA SHARMA,AGRA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1)(1), AGRA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 90/AGR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra27 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

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

Section 234BSection 40Section 40A(3)

Section 40A(3) is arbitrary, unjust, wrong, illegal, and against the facts and law of the case. 3. Because in any view, the ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming the interest charged u/s 234B and 234C which is wrong, and illegal.” 2. Apropos Ground No.1, the AO, while making addition of Rs.3,13,078/-, by making disallowance

M/S. VENUS AUTO FIROZABAD,FIROZABAD vs. ACIT-2 RANGE-5, FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 64/AGR/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2

10
Section 40A(3)10
Disallowance10
ITAT Agra
19 Dec 2017
AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenavenus Auto Vs..Dcit-Range-5, Bye Pass Road, Firozabad. Firozabad. Panno.Aacfv2616H (Assessee) (Revenue)

Section 2Section 234BSection 36

234B and 234C. This second round of litigation. The Hon’ble High Court, vide order dated 2. 10.03.2017, has remitted the matter to us, to record a specific finding as to the amount of interest free loan given by the assessee in the previous year relevant to A.Y. 2010-11, i.e., the year under consideration and to pass order consequential

GOPALDAS SHIVHARE,GUNA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 136/AGR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra21 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 234BSection 40ASection 40A(3)

disallowance of Rs. 3,30,700/- in above heads. 3. That Ld. CIT (Appeals) has wrongly & illegally confirmed the charging of interest levied upon your appellant u/s 234B of the IT Act because the entire receipt of transportation are received from various companies by your appellant and TCS on all receipt of transportation and on bank interest are deducted

MAHIM PATRAN P. LTD,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT -2, AGRA

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 195/AGR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 143(3)Section 199(1)Section 205Section 263

3) is only to make rules for allowing credit of TDS. The same cannot be read to mean that the board is empowered to disallow the credit of TDS by inserting rules. ITA Nos. 195 & 196/Agr/2015 15 In this regard, reliance is placed on the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Taj Mahal

MR. PRAMOD KUMAR KHANDELWAL,AGRA vs. DY.C.I.T.-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed in the terms indicated

ITA 200/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 145Section 271(1)Section 44A

234B and 234C and initiating penalty proceedings U/S 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act, 1961. That the appellate order dated 30th March, 2016 passed by the 7. learned CIT(A)-I, Agra is against the law and facts of the assessee’s case. The appellant also seeks permission to modify and/or adduce any other ground/grounds of appeal as the circumstances

MR. PRAMOD KUMAR KHANDELWAL,AGRA vs. DY.C.I.T.-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed in the terms indicated

ITA 201/AGR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Apr 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 145Section 271(1)Section 44A

234B and 234C and initiating penalty proceedings U/S 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act, 1961. That the appellate order dated 30th March, 2016 passed by the 7. learned CIT(A)-I, Agra is against the law and facts of the assessee’s case. The appellant also seeks permission to modify and/or adduce any other ground/grounds of appeal as the circumstances

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

234B, and 234C which is wrong, and illegal. 7. Because in any view, and without prejudice to the above grounds, additions made, interest charged, and the Assessment Order passed is wrong, illegal, without proper opportunity, bad in law and against the facts and law of the case.” 1.1. The Revenue has raised the following grounds: “1. That

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

234B, and 234C which is wrong, and illegal. 7. Because in any view, and without prejudice to the above grounds, additions made, interest charged, and the Assessment Order passed is wrong, illegal, without proper opportunity, bad in law and against the facts and law of the case.” 1.1. The Revenue has raised the following grounds: “1. That

M/S GINNI FILAMENTS LTD.,MATHURA vs. A.C.I.T., RANGE-3, MATHURA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 173/AGR/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 234BSection 44A

234B & 234C of the 'Act'. 11. BECAUSE, the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and principles of natural justice.” 2. Effectively ground No. 2(a) to 2(c) pertain to rejection of books of account and estimation of gross profit @ 16% as against 13.96% disclosed by the assessee. 3. Apropos these grounds ld. AR for the assessee

SMT ARCHANA DUTTA,MATHURA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3, MATHURA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 330/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra14 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenasmt. Archana Dutta, Prop. M/S Vs..Acit,Circle-3, Dutta & Dutta Construction, Co., Mathura. 77E Dutta & Dutta Construction, Govind Nagar, Mathura. Panno.Afxpd7557B (Assessee) (Revenue)

Section 144Section 145(3)Section 234BSection 43BSection 44ASection 68

section 234B of the Act as the Income of the assessee is subjected to TDS.” 2. The assessee is engaged in the business of Civil Contractor and work of road construction under government departments. Return of income was e-filed on 24.09.2011 declaring total income at Rs. 17,96,170/- and the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. However

ANURAG MITTAL ,FIROZABAD vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 136/AGR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra06 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 153ASection 153DSection 234A

disallowance is called for in the case of the ‘appellant’ as the Commission was duly paid in respect of services utilized by the ‘appellant’. 3 BECAUSE, interest under section 234A & 234B

PRAMOD KUMAR DUBEY,GWALIOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,1(3), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 314/AGR/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 Sept 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: BEFORE, SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manuj Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 111ASection 112ASection 112A(6)Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 87A

disallowed. The tax liability of Rs. 13,319/- was upheld, and together with interest under sections 234B and 234C amounting to Rs. 1,969/-, and health and education cess of Rs.533/-, a total demand of Rs. 15,820/- was raised. Notably, the said intimation did not specify any reason or adjustment under section 143(1)(a), nor did it issue

ANKITA PALIWAL,ALIGARH, UTTAR PRADESH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALIGARH

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

ITA 195/AGR/2024[AY 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra06 Feb 2025

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234ASection 90

234B, 234C of the Act. 6. That each of the above mentioned grounds are without prejudice to one another and the appellant craves leave to add/amend to the grounds in interest of justice at any time before the disposal of the appeal.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed her return of income on 25.07.2018,declaring

ANIL KUMAR,ETAH vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(3)(1), ETAH

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

ITA 262/AGR/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234A

section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, based on a preset mind, without any independent application of mind or without extraction of the taxable income. 3. That the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (NFAC) has erred in law and on facts to uphold the impugned order passed by the learned Assessing Officer even when the assessing officer acted

PEHAL,CHHATARPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), GWALIOR

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

ITA 46/AGR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra09 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Parekh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

disallowing exemption u/s. 11 of Rs.583240/-. 3 5. That, the appellant craves leave to add, amend, withdraw any ground (s) of appeal before and/or at the time of hearing.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income for the impugned assessment year on 12.10.2010, declaring Nil income. Assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer

TOMAR BROTHERS,ETAWAH vs. ITO-2(2)(5), ETAWAH

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 255/AGR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

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

Section 143(2)Section 234B

disallowance @ of 20% aggregating to aggregating to Rs.10,54,363/- under the head ‘Sundry Debtors & Creditors’. Because while making the assessment ‘AO’ made various 5. observations /conclusions which are contrary to facts available on records. While making the addition submission made and evidences filed have been rejected arbitrarily. I.T.A No. 255/Agra/2018 3 6. BECAUSE, the 'appellant' denies levy of interest

RAJVEER SINGH YADAV CONTRACTOR,ETAWAH vs. ITO-2(2)(5), , ETAWAH

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 179/AGR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra27 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 234B

3. BECAUSE, while confirming the addition the Ld CIT(A) was highly unjustified in confirming ad- hoc disallowance of Rs. 47,88,313/- ignoring the fact on records that Audit Report stood brought on records of the AO as such existence of Books of Accounts cannot be denied. ' . 4. BECAUSE, the 'appellant' denies levy of interest under section 234B

TAHIR KHAN,JHANSI vs. ITO, JHANSI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 360/AGR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 234BSection 56(2)(vii)Section 68

disallowance of Rs.50,000/- out of Salary Rs.3,70,000/-, shop expenses 3 Rs.44,173/-, Travelling Expenses Rs.48,657/-, Mobile expenses Rs.5,845/-, Generator Expenses Rs.6,790/- and Accounting charges Rs.18,000/- that too in casual and routine manner without pin pointing any specific item is grossly arbitrary, highly unjust, wrong and illegal. 3.8 BECAUSE, while making the assessment

NEETA AGARWAL,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 2(1)(2), AGRA, AGRA

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

ITA 213/AGR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing) Neeta Agarwal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, E-23, New Agra, Agra Ward-2(1)(2), Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaxpa0936E Assessee By : Shri Amit Goyal, Adv Shri Nitin Goyal, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2025

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goyal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 234BSection 271(1)Section 68Section 69C

3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 95,20,372 under section 68 of the Act, 1961 whereas in the appellant case section 68 was not applicable. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances

MANISH KUMAR CHATURVEDI,JHANSI vs. ITO WARD 2(3)(2), JHANSI

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

ITA 41/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra06 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Manish Kumar Chaturvedi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 1882, Shivaji Nagar, Jhansic Ward-2(3)(2), 284001 Jhansi 284 001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Akkpc5294Q Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/02/2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. DR
Section 142Section 144Section 250

234B of the Act is unwarranted. (b) That further in any view of the case, the initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 274 r.w.s 271 of the Act and under section 270A(2) (b) and 271F of the Act is unwarranted. Manish Kumar Chaturvedi 9. That the appellate order dated 01.12.2023 passed by the Ld. CIT (A) is against