Search: disallowance | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

3,134 results for “disallowance”+ Section 11(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai15,386 Delhi12,696 Bangalore4,488 Chennai4,336 Kolkata3,837 Ahmedabad3,134 Pune2,983 Hyderabad2,037 Jaipur1,804 Chandigarh1,134 Surat1,101 Indore1,007 Cochin786 Raipur678 Visakhapatnam661 Cuttack562 Karnataka539 Rajkot518 Amritsar472 Nagpur430 Lucknow360 Agra222 Panaji221 Jodhpur203 Guwahati175 Ranchi161 Telangana142 Allahabad128 SC114 Patna113 Dehradun104 Calcutta84 Jabalpur60 Varanasi47 Kerala44 Punjab & Haryana21 Rajasthan11 Orissa10 Himachal Pradesh7 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN5 Gauhati2 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1 Andhra Pradesh1 Tripura1 Uttarakhand1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Addition to Income83 Section 14A78 Disallowance71 Section 143(3)59 Section 6833 Section 14732 Deduction31 Section 14828 Section 54F23 Penalty

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 806/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri N. R. Soni, CIT-D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate

Section 11Section 129Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 244A

Showing 1–20 of 3,134 · Page 1 of 157

...

20

Section 271(1)(c)18

5 then the trust would lose the benefit under section 11 on its total surplus whereas the stand of the assessee is, even assuming there is any violation, then, only the income in respect of such investment will be excluded from the benefit of exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act. For buttressing the stand the assessee

THE ACIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2344/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri N. R. Soni, CIT-D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate

Section 11Section 129Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 244A

5 then the trust would lose the benefit under section 11 on its total surplus whereas the stand of the assessee is, even assuming there is any violation, then, only the income in respect of such investment will be excluded from the benefit of exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act. For buttressing the stand the assessee

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 265/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri N. R. Soni, CIT-D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate

Section 11Section 129Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 244A

5 then the trust would lose the benefit under section 11 on its total surplus whereas the stand of the assessee is, even assuming there is any violation, then, only the income in respect of such investment will be excluded from the benefit of exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act. For buttressing the stand the assessee

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 805/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri N. R. Soni, CIT-D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate

Section 11Section 129Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 244A

5 then the trust would lose the benefit under section 11 on its total surplus whereas the stand of the assessee is, even assuming there is any violation, then, only the income in respect of such investment will be excluded from the benefit of exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act. For buttressing the stand the assessee

THE DCIT (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE KHODAL DHAM TRUST, KAGWAD, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 904/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedअपील सं./Ita No.904/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 D.C.I.T.(Exemptions) Shree Khodal Dham Trust, Circle-2, Vs. Kagwad, Ahmedabad. Alka Society, 4Th Floor, Shri Sardar Patel Bhavan, Near Water Tank, Rajkot-360004. Pan: Aajts1017J

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT.D.R

Section 11Section 12A

section 11(5] r.w.s. 13(l](dj in respect of advance of Rs. 1.5 crores to Sardar Patel Cultural Foundation, had bearing on disallowance

THE DY..DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

ITA 1273/AHD/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

disallowing the depreciation which was claimed under Section 32 of the Act was that once the capital expenditure is treated as application of income for charitable purposes, the assessees had virtually enjoyed a 100 per cent write off of the cost of assets and, therefore, the grant of depreciation would amount to giving double benefit to the assessee. Though

THE DY..DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

ITA 1272/AHD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

disallowing the depreciation which was claimed under Section 32 of the Act was that once the capital expenditure is treated as application of income for charitable purposes, the assessees had virtually enjoyed a 100 per cent write off of the cost of assets and, therefore, the grant of depreciation would amount to giving double benefit to the assessee. Though

GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

ITA 1253/AHD/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

disallowing the depreciation which was claimed under Section 32 of the Act was that once the capital expenditure is treated as application of income for charitable purposes, the assessees had virtually enjoyed a 100 per cent write off of the cost of assets and, therefore, the grant of depreciation would amount to giving double benefit to the assessee. Though

THE DY..DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

ITA 1270/AHD/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

disallowing the depreciation which was claimed under Section 32 of the Act was that once the capital expenditure is treated as application of income for charitable purposes, the assessees had virtually enjoyed a 100 per cent write off of the cost of assets and, therefore, the grant of depreciation would amount to giving double benefit to the assessee. Though

GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

ITA 1254/AHD/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

disallowing the depreciation which was claimed under Section 32 of the Act was that once the capital expenditure is treated as application of income for charitable purposes, the assessees had virtually enjoyed a 100 per cent write off of the cost of assets and, therefore, the grant of depreciation would amount to giving double benefit to the assessee. Though

GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

ITA 1256/AHD/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

disallowing the depreciation which was claimed under Section 32 of the Act was that once the capital expenditure is treated as application of income for charitable purposes, the assessees had virtually enjoyed a 100 per cent write off of the cost of assets and, therefore, the grant of depreciation would amount to giving double benefit to the assessee. Though

PARUL AROGYA SEVA MANDAL TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 992/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 12ASection 133ASection 80G(5)

disallowed exemptions under Sections 11 and 12, treating the income as normal business income due to violations of the trust's objectives. The Ld.CIT(A) partially upheld the AO's additions but allowed the exemptions under Sections 11 and 12, concluding there was no apparent violation of Section 13 of the Act. 7.1. We have also noted that the survey

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD vs. PARUL AROGYA SEVA MANDAL TRUST, , AHMEDABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 1019/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 12ASection 133ASection 80G(5)

disallowed exemptions under Sections 11 and 12, treating the income as normal business income due to violations of the trust's objectives. The Ld.CIT(A) partially upheld the AO's additions but allowed the exemptions under Sections 11 and 12, concluding there was no apparent violation of Section 13 of the Act. 7.1. We have also noted that the survey

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. PARUL AROGYA SEVA MANDAL TRUST, AHMEDABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 1018/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 12ASection 133ASection 80G(5)

disallowed exemptions under Sections 11 and 12, treating the income as normal business income due to violations of the trust's objectives. The Ld.CIT(A) partially upheld the AO's additions but allowed the exemptions under Sections 11 and 12, concluding there was no apparent violation of Section 13 of the Act. 7.1. We have also noted that the survey

PARUL AROGYA SEVA MANDAL TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 991/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 12ASection 133ASection 80G(5)

disallowed exemptions under Sections 11 and 12, treating the income as normal business income due to violations of the trust's objectives. The Ld.CIT(A) partially upheld the AO's additions but allowed the exemptions under Sections 11 and 12, concluding there was no apparent violation of Section 13 of the Act. 7.1. We have also noted that the survey

PARUL UNIVERSITY,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT,EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 993/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 12ASection 133ASection 80G(5)

disallowed exemptions under Sections 11 and 12, treating the income as normal business income due to violations of the trust's objectives. The Ld.CIT(A) partially upheld the AO's additions but allowed the exemptions under Sections 11 and 12, concluding there was no apparent violation of Section 13 of the Act. 7.1. We have also noted that the survey

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT STATE BOARD OF SCHOOL TEXT BOOK, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the M

ITA 23/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)

disallowed the exemption claimed by the Assessee Trust. 2.2 Thus Ld. A.O. framed the Assessment Order under section 143(3) of the Act on 17/12/2018 assessing total income of the assessee at Rs.16,37,29,790/- invoking section 11(4) of the Act and allowed 15% of net income instead of gross income as per I.T.A

DCIT(E), CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT STATE BOARD OF SCHOOL TEXT BOOK, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the M

ITA 21/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)

disallowed the exemption claimed by the Assessee Trust. 2.2 Thus Ld. A.O. framed the Assessment Order under section 143(3) of the Act on 17/12/2018 assessing total income of the assessee at Rs.16,37,29,790/- invoking section 11(4) of the Act and allowed 15% of net income instead of gross income as per I.T.A

DCIT (EXMP) CIRCLE 1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT STATE BOARD OF SCHOOL TEXT BOOK, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the M

ITA 20/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)

disallowed the exemption claimed by the Assessee Trust. 2.2 Thus Ld. A.O. framed the Assessment Order under section 143(3) of the Act on 17/12/2018 assessing total income of the assessee at Rs.16,37,29,790/- invoking section 11(4) of the Act and allowed 15% of net income instead of gross income as per I.T.A

DCIT (EXMP) CIRCLE-1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT STATE BOARD OF SCHOOL TEXT BOOK, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the M

ITA 22/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)

disallowed the exemption claimed by the Assessee Trust. 2.2 Thus Ld. A.O. framed the Assessment Order under section 143(3) of the Act on 17/12/2018 assessing total income of the assessee at Rs.16,37,29,790/- invoking section 11(4) of the Act and allowed 15% of net income instead of gross income as per I.T.A