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.

54 results for “disallowance”+ Section 10Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai601Bangalore527Delhi494Chennai234Kolkata131Pune72Karnataka58Hyderabad58Ahmedabad54Jaipur39Visakhapatnam23Rajkot20Surat18Telangana13Cochin12Lucknow11Guwahati10Amritsar8Indore8Chandigarh6Jodhpur5Dehradun3Raipur3Nagpur2SC2Varanasi2Cuttack2Panaji1Ranchi1Calcutta1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 12A82Section 1154Section 10A42Section 143(3)42Disallowance34Addition to Income34Exemption27Section 143(1)25Deduction24Section 80G

M/S. SAHAJANAND LASER TECHNOLOGY LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 15/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 15 & 16/Ahd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Ms. Arti N Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, CIT. DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35

10A(7B) and section 10AA of the Act on the statute. Considering the provisions of the Act as discussed above and the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of Chennai Tribunal referred above, we hold that the assessee was eligible for deduction u/s.10AA of the Act for the unexpired period of ten consecutive assessment years. Accordingly, the assessee was entitled

Showing 1–20 of 54 · Page 1 of 3

20
Section 26318
Section 2(15)18

M/S. SAHAJANAND LASER TECHNOLOGY LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 16/AHD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 15 & 16/Ahd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Ms. Arti N Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, CIT. DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35

10A(7B) and section 10AA of the Act on the statute. Considering the provisions of the Act as discussed above and the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of Chennai Tribunal referred above, we hold that the assessee was eligible for deduction u/s.10AA of the Act for the unexpired period of ten consecutive assessment years. Accordingly, the assessee was entitled

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1) (1) AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR AHMEDABAD vs. INDUCTOTHERM (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 598/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Ms. Chandni Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 92C

Disallowance of Rs.46,07,317/- under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act for payments made to non-residents without deducting tax at source under Section 195 of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), who deleted the above additions and granted relief to the assessee. The Revenue

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. SAHAJANAND LASER TECHNOLOGY LIMITED, GANDHINAGAR

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

ITA 496/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Ms. Arti Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

Section 10A of the Act. The Assessing Officer further made following disallowances: - Total income as per return of income 1,27,99,512/- Add: Additions/Disallowables

SAHAJANAND LASER TECHNOLOGY LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1431/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Ms. Arti Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

Section 10A of the Act. The Assessing Officer further made following disallowances: - Total income as per return of income 1,27,99,512/- Add: Additions/Disallowables

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 365/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Axis Bank Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Opp. Income-Tax, Samartheshwar Temple, Nr. Law Circle 1(1)(1), Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380006 Pan : Aaacu 2414 K अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2023/03.04.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 10.04.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee-Appellant Has Challenged Correctness Of The Order Dated 28Th July, 2022 Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act” For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. 2. Ground No.1 Raised By The Assessee Reads As Under:- “1. Disallowance In Respect Of Annual Technical Fees (Tax Effect - Rs. 16,84,276) 1.1 The Learned Drp Has Erred In Upholding Addition Made By Ao In Respect Of Treating Annual Technical Services (Ats) Fees Paid To Infosys Limited To The Extent Of Rs. 48.66 Lacs As Prior Period Expense. 1.2. It Is Submitted That The Expenditure Relates To Amount Payable To Infosys & No Part Of The Amount Was Claimed As Expenditure At Any Time In The 2 Axis Bank Limited Vs. Acit Ay : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C

disallowed in the case of the assessee in the preceding years, as noted by the AO i.e. Asst. Year 2013-14 to 2015-16. To this, the ld. 19 Axis Bank Limited Vs. ACIT AY : 2018-19 Counsel pointed out that the matter had been restored back to the AO for adjudication afresh by the ITAT. 34. In view

THIRD EYE ENTERPRISE,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(15) NOW WARD- 3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 648/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 10ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 243(3)Section 263

disallowing the deduction claimed under Section 10AA of the Act as it is a mandatory condition prescribed under Section 10AA(8) of the Act read with Section 10A

SHRIDEV PROCON LTD.,(EARLIER KNOWN AS DEV PROCON LTD),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 300/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.300/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shridev Procon Limited Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ (Earlier Known As Dev Procon Income Tax, V/S. Limited) Central Circle – 2 (1) Dev House Ahmedabad B/H. Rajpat Club, S.G.Highway Ahmedabad – 380 052 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaccd 1788 P (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, Ar & Shri Gulab Thakor, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Ketaki Desai, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, AR &For Respondent: Ms. Ketaki Desai, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 68

disallowance of Rs.27,83,725/- under Section 36(1)(iii) made by the AO. 15. During the course of hearing before us, the AR reiterated the facts and stated that the assessee has also received Rs.41.92 Crore as interest free loans. The AR explained these amounts from Note No. 4 – Short Term Borrowings. As per this note the Interest Free

QUICKSTART RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INDIA PVT. LTD. ( NOW KNOWN AS TALENT ANYWHERE SERVICES PVT. LTD., ),BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, BARODA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 412/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Shri Yogesh G. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Dinesh Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 133(6)Section 250(6)

section 10A. The assesses has not brought to our knowledge any circular specifically on 10A which provides contrary to circular 1/2005, Therefore we uphold the AO’s action in disallowing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA vs. GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1653/AHD/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr Brr Kumarshri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 1596/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah, Advocate and Shri Jimi Patel, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 250(4)

10A or section 10B or] section 11 or section 12 apply, if any such amount is credited to the profit and loss account; or [ (iia) the amount of depreciation debited to the profit and loss account (excluding the depreciation on account of revaluation of assets); or (iib ) the amount withdrawn from revaluation reserve and credited to the profit and loss

GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPN. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1596/AHD/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr Brr Kumarshri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 1596/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah, Advocate and Shri Jimi Patel, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 250(4)

10A or section 10B or] section 11 or section 12 apply, if any such amount is credited to the profit and loss account; or [ (iia) the amount of depreciation debited to the profit and loss account (excluding the depreciation on account of revaluation of assets); or (iib ) the amount withdrawn from revaluation reserve and credited to the profit and loss

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. KOTA BARAN TOLLWAY PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 2025/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Jaimin Shah, A.R
Section 80I

disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act has to be considered as business profit eligible for deduction under Section 10A

ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA vs. M/S LINDE ENGINEERING PVT LTD, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is also dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1983/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 92C(4)

section 250 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12. 2. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal :- “On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 10A

NACHIKET DIPAK SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1330/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1330/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Nachiket Dipak Shah The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ C4-C5, Incubation Centre, Ward-5(3)(2) V/S. It–Ites Sez Ahmedabad Million Mind Sez B/H. Nirma University Off. S.G. Road Ahmedabad – 382 481 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Amjps 7085 G अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr.DR
Section 10ASection 10A(5)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154

disallowed the claim under Section 143(1) of the Act, citing the assessee’s failure to file the mandatory audit report in Form 56F along with the return of income as required under Section 10AA(8), read with Section 10A

VINAYAKA EDUCATION TRUST,NADIAD vs. THE DDIT, CPC, BENGALURU JURIS. AO- THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1402/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Dec 2025AY 2021-22
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154Section 250

disallowed the application of income of Rs.3,67,53,006/-\nand the accumulation of Rs.59,97,501/-. Interest under sections 234A,\n234B, 234C and 234F was also charged and a demand of Rs.1,87,34,360/-\nwas raised.\n2.3 Aggrieved by the intimation under section 143(1), the assessee filed an\napplication for rectification under section 154, however

RANDHEJA DUDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD.,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-3 NOW WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 649/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Guptaasstt. Year : 2017-18 Randheja Dudh Utpadak The Ito, Ward-3 Sahakari Mandli Ltd. Vs Now Ward-1 To-Randheja Gandhinagar. Tal: Gandhinagar Pin : 382 620 Pan : Aacar 5164 K (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short Referred To As Ld.Cit(A)] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 22.11.2021 Pertaining To Asst.Year 2017-18. 2. The Registry Has Notified That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By Limitation By 581 Days. In Order To Explain The Reasons For The Impugned Delay, The Ld.Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Cit(A)/Nfac Order Was Passed Against The Assessee On 22.11.2021. However, Due To Covid-19 Pandemic Limitation For Filing Appeal Before The Court Of Law Was Extended Till February, 2022. Therefore, After Expiry Of The Limitation For Filing Of The Appeal On Feb., 2022, The Assessee Was Required To File Appeal Within 60 Days Of The Same I.E. By April, 2022. But The Assessee Could File The Appeal On

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.DR
Section 250

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer invoking Section 80AC of the Act, noting that in terms of the said section the claim would have been allowable to the assessee even if the same is claimed in a belated or revised return, however, since the assessee having not filed a valid return of income in the instant case, such deduction

ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 959/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Mahavir Prasadassessment Year : 2011-12 Ananya Finance For Inclusive The Dcit, Cir.1(1)(1) Growth P Ltd. Ambawadi 401, Shaan, Op: M.J. Library Ahmedabad 380015. Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. Pan : Aahca 8023 D

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 250Section 250(6)

disallowance of depreciation, is that during the impugned year the assessee had claimed deprecation of Rs.7.58 crores on addition of Rs.30.32 crores under the head intangible assets. During assessment proceedings it transpired that the intangible assets pertained to know-how, acquired by the assessee under a Business Transfer Agreement (BTA) entered into with a trust viz. Friends of Women

SHRI MANAV VIKAS FOUNDATION,CHAMARAJ, TL. VADHAVAN vs. ITO, WARD-2(EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the asessee is allowed

ITA 723/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kakoli Uttam Ghosh, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 119(2)(b)Section 124(1)(b)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

disallowed. Furthermore, the appellant also requested to keep the present appeal proceedings in abeyance till the disposal of condonation application filed u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act before the Pr. CIT(Exemptions). New Delhi. In this regard, kind attention is drawn to the provisions of section 12A of the Act wherein conditions for applicability of sections

CREST SPECIALITY RESINS PRIVATE LIMITED,KHEDA, GUJARAT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD (NOW DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD), AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for both the years under consideration

ITA 1583/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Srivastava, Sr. D.R
Section 250Section 35Section 40A(2)(b)

section 10A(2)(b) of the Act was of the general nature. Therefore, claim of commission payment to the amount of Rs. 7,50,000/- was disallowed

CREST SPECIALITY RESINS PRIVATE LIMITED,KHEDA, GUJARAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD (NOW DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1)(1),AHMEDABAD), AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for both the years under\nconsideration

ITA 1585/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 May 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Srivastava, Sr. D.R
Section 35Section 40A(2)(b)

section 10A(2)(b) of the Act was of the general nature. Therefore,\nclaim of commission payment to the amount of Rs.7,50,000/- was disallowed