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.

11 results for “disallowance”+ Section 54F(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai301Delhi265Chennai167Bangalore118Ahmedabad93Hyderabad86Jaipur72Pune70Kolkata51Surat39Indore34Visakhapatnam29Chandigarh24Cochin18Karnataka14Nagpur13Lucknow13Raipur12Agra11Rajkot9Jodhpur9Cuttack8Patna7Jabalpur4Ranchi4Dehradun4Telangana2Varanasi2Allahabad2Amritsar2SC1

Key Topics

Section 10(38)20Section 5420Section 1478Disallowance8Addition to Income8Section 54F7Exemption6Section 153A5Section 54B5Deduction

ANIL KUMAR GOYAL HUF,FIROZABAD vs. ITO WARD-5(1), FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 189/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year:2012-13

Section 54Section 54F

disallowed the claim of the assessee u/s. 54F. 3. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) had confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer in paragraph No. 7 to 7.3, wherein it was held as under : 7. I have considered

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S RAKESH SHIVHARE & NISHA MITTAL, MORENA

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

ITA 117/AGR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019
5
Section 1443
Section 1483
AY 2005-06

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

Section 10(38)Section 153A

Disallowance of exemption u/s 10(38) of the IT Act claimed for Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 4,99,59,467 on sale of shares are hereby deleted and these grounds of appeal are allowed." 26. It was submitted that on the basis of the above that once the submission has been accepted by the Settlement Commission then

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S SUNIL KUMAR MITTAL & MAMTA MITTAL, MORENA

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

ITA 128/AGR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

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

Section 10(38)Section 153A

Disallowance of exemption u/s 10(38) of the IT Act claimed for Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 4,99,59,467 on sale of shares are hereby deleted and these grounds of appeal are allowed." 26. It was submitted that on the basis of the above that once the submission has been accepted by the Settlement Commission then

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S VANDANA JAIN & RAMA BANSAL, MORENA

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

ITA 169/AGR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

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

Section 10(38)Section 153A

Disallowance of exemption u/s 10(38) of the IT Act claimed for Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 4,99,59,467 on sale of shares are hereby deleted and these grounds of appeal are allowed." 26. It was submitted that on the basis of the above that once the submission has been accepted by the Settlement Commission then

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2,, AGRA vs. M/S SAKSHI TAIRI & CHHAYA BATTAD, MORENA

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

ITA 170/AGR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

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

Section 10(38)Section 153A

Disallowance of exemption u/s 10(38) of the IT Act claimed for Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 4,99,59,467 on sale of shares are hereby deleted and these grounds of appeal are allowed." 26. It was submitted that on the basis of the above that once the submission has been accepted by the Settlement Commission then

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S SHYAM SUNDER & MANISH TAORI, MORENA

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

ITA 124/AGR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

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

Section 10(38)Section 153A

Disallowance of exemption u/s 10(38) of the IT Act claimed for Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 4,99,59,467 on sale of shares are hereby deleted and these grounds of appeal are allowed." 26. It was submitted that on the basis of the above that once the submission has been accepted by the Settlement Commission then

DINESH CHANDRA DUTTA,ALIGARH vs. CIT A, ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 786/AGR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra08 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 54Section 54ESection 54F

1), C/o N.A. Siddiqi, Advocate, Aligarh. 7, Anon House, Civil Lines, Aligarh. PAN: ABMPB3271D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. I.A. Siddiqi, Advocate Smt. Sita Srivastava, Sr. DR Respondent by Date of Hearing 05.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement 08.03.2021 ORDER Per Laliet Kumar, J.M.: This appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2915-16 is directed against the order dated

JAWAHAR LAL AGARWAL,AGRA vs. I.T.O., WARD-4(2), AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 336/AGR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Agra24 Nov 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 129Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 50CSection 54BSection 54F

1. Because in any view, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in disallowing deduction u/s 54B of the I.T. Act for making investment of Amount of Rs. 14,09,670/- in purchase of agriculture land being in the name of minor Daughter, which is grossly, arbitrarily, perverse, wrong & illegal in the Peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. I.T.A

SHAMIM QURESHI,JHANSI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JHANSI

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

ITA 587/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhshamim Qureshi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 651/1, Cic Campus, Jhansi Jhokhan Bagh, Jhansi,Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aajpq3427C Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Agarwal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 18/03/2026

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 54F

1. The appeal in ITA No. 587/AGR/2025 for AY 2015-16, arises out of the order of the ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 23.09.2024 against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated

HARI SINGH,MATHURA vs. ITO WARD-3(2), MATHURA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes treated as

ITA 440/AGR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

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

Section 144Section 54Section 54BSection 54CSection 54F

1,70,000/- at Bharatpur and remaining amount of sale proceeds was Incurred in making payments due for labour engaged and material purchase for construction of new residential house at village chharora post chhatikara Distt- Mathura and thus the appellant was confident that he has no liability of any tax. 3. That the assessing officer completed the assessment u/s 144/147

GIREESH CHANDRA,ETAH vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), ETAH, ETAH

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 264/AGR/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 54F

54F of the Act, but for no avail. Therefore, learned Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s. 147/143(3) of the Act and assessed total income at Rs.11,49,800/-. 3. Aggrieved, assessee filed an appeal before learned CIT(Appeals), who dismissed assessee’s first appeal for want of details of improvement in property and other supporting documents to justify