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.

2 results for “disallowance”+ Section 80P(2)(a)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai879Bangalore625Pune417Cochin314Chennai274Delhi161Kolkata143Ahmedabad140Panaji103Visakhapatnam87Nagpur78Jaipur63Surat58Chandigarh55Hyderabad55Rajkot47Lucknow45Indore41Raipur40Karnataka16Jodhpur16Amritsar11Jabalpur10Kerala7Varanasi6SC4Calcutta3Ranchi3Agra2Dehradun2Telangana2Patna1Orissa1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 80P2Section 80A2

SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT JAMNER,GUNA vs. ITO, GUNA

Appeal is allowed

ITA 48/AGR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra05 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Ms. Prarthana Jalan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Shailendra Shrivastava, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 80ASection 80P

2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 3. It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from the assessee and the Revenue side that both the learned lower authorities have disallowed the assessee’s section 80P

JOURA CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING SOCIETY LIMITED ,MORENA, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ITO, MORENA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 237/AGR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2018-19 Joura Co-Operative Marketing Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Society Limited Ward-1, Morena The Joura Dist Morena Dist. Morena Pan :Aabaj1828K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri S. N. Agarwal, Ca Department By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2026 Order

Section 144Section 148Section 151Section 68

2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer in reopening the case of the appellant merely to verify the source of credits/cash deposit in bank account of the appellant even when credits/cash deposits in bank accounts was not information