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.

213 results for “disallowance”+ Section 161(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai956Delhi853Kolkata252Chennai242Bangalore241Ahmedabad213Jaipur198Pune138Hyderabad114Cochin91Indore76Chandigarh61Raipur55Surat52Panaji45Nagpur31Lucknow28Visakhapatnam24Allahabad21Amritsar13Rajkot11Karnataka11Agra10SC9Patna8Dehradun6Guwahati6Calcutta6Cuttack5Telangana4Jodhpur3Kerala3Ranchi3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Rajasthan1Punjab & Haryana1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 80I69Section 143(3)57Disallowance52Section 143(2)50Addition to Income45Section 2(15)40Section 26336Deduction35Section 14A29Section 148

ATUL LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 38/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Atul Limited Acit, Cir.1(1)(1) Atul House, Gi Patel Mark Vs Ahmedabad. Mithila Society, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aabca 2390 M (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/05/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, AR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

Showing 1–20 of 213 · Page 1 of 11

...
28
Section 143(1)25
Exemption24
Section 92C

161 taxmann.com 158 (Delhi)], wherein it was held that – 23. A conspectus of the aforementioned judicial pronouncements would lead us to safely conclude that the scheme of Section 115JB, particularly in relation to Clause (f) of Explanation 1 therein, does not envisage any addition of disallowance

THE ACIT,(OSD)CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. TORRENT POWER LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the Cross-objection of the assessee, both are dismissed

ITA 1668/AHD/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vartik ChowkshiFor Respondent: Shri Samir Tekriwal, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 14A, where he is not satisfied with the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of such an expenditure. In view of the above narrated facts and points of law disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D is reworked as under. Details Rs. (a) Direct expenses Nil (b) Indirect expenses (Interest charged to P & L A/c.) 434725125 (c) Investment

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

161 ITD 393], which had held that Section 14A of the Act disallowance cannot be added to the book profit under Section 115JB of the Act. These rulings were based on the clear distinction between the normal tax computation and the computation under MAT. The Bench, in the earlier year, also held that the book profit under Section 115JB

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

disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. The corpus donation of Rs.16,03,22,815/- was also brought to tax by invoking the provision of section 2(24)(iia). The claim of an amount of Rs.2,28,105/- as deduction being loss on sale/write off of asset has also been denied on the premise that once

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

disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. The corpus donation of Rs.16,03,22,815/- was also brought to tax by invoking the provision of section 2(24)(iia). The claim of an amount of Rs.2,28,105/- as deduction being loss on sale/write off of asset has also been denied on the premise that once

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

disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. The corpus donation of Rs.16,03,22,815/- was also brought to tax by invoking the provision of section 2(24)(iia). The claim of an amount of Rs.2,28,105/- as deduction being loss on sale/write off of asset has also been denied on the premise that once

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

disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. The corpus donation of Rs.16,03,22,815/- was also brought to tax by invoking the provision of section 2(24)(iia). The claim of an amount of Rs.2,28,105/- as deduction being loss on sale/write off of asset has also been denied on the premise that once

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. AXIS BANK LTD, ELISBRIDGE

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 48/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254

disallowing the claim of the assessee has been duly considered by the Special Bench Tribunal decision in the case of Biocon supra and relief was allowed to the assessee. The Counsel for the assessee submitted that ESOP scheme under which the benefits were provided to its employees was forming part of the Annual Report, for the year under consideration (reference

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. AXIS BANK LIMITED, ELLISBRIDGE

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 49/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254

disallowing the claim of the assessee has been duly considered by the Special Bench Tribunal decision in the case of Biocon supra and relief was allowed to the assessee. The Counsel for the assessee submitted that ESOP scheme under which the benefits were provided to its employees was forming part of the Annual Report, for the year under consideration (reference

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 142/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254

disallowing the claim of the assessee has been duly considered by the Special Bench Tribunal decision in the case of Biocon supra and relief was allowed to the assessee. The Counsel for the assessee submitted that ESOP scheme under which the benefits were provided to its employees was forming part of the Annual Report, for the year under consideration (reference

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 143/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254

disallowing the claim of the assessee has been duly considered by the Special Bench Tribunal decision in the case of Biocon supra and relief was allowed to the assessee. The Counsel for the assessee submitted that ESOP scheme under which the benefits were provided to its employees was forming part of the Annual Report, for the year under consideration (reference

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD vs. EDELWEISS BROKING LTD., AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 446/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Respondent: Shri Dileep Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32Section 36Section 36(2)Section 37Section 48Section 73

Section 32 of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of buildings, machinery, plant or furniture owned by an assessee and used for the purposes of the business or profession. Under this section, for getting depreciation, the following two conditions should be satisfied: (i) The asset in question should be owned by the assessee; and (ii) The asset should

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD vs. EDELWEISS FINANCIAL ADVISORS LTD., ( FORMERLY KNOWN ANAGRAM STOCK BROKING LTD.,), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 445/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Respondent: Shri Dileep Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32Section 36Section 36(2)Section 37Section 48Section 73

Section 32 of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of buildings, machinery, plant or furniture owned by an assessee and used for the purposes of the business or profession. Under this section, for getting depreciation, the following two conditions should be satisfied: (i) The asset in question should be owned by the assessee; and (ii) The asset should

M/S. EDELWEISS BROKING LTD. ( AMALGAMATING COMPANY EDELWEISS FINANCIAL ADVISORS LTD.),AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT. CIT, RANGE-3,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 318/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Respondent: Shri Dileep Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32Section 36Section 36(2)Section 37Section 48Section 73

Section 32 of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of buildings, machinery, plant or furniture owned by an assessee and used for the purposes of the business or profession. Under this section, for getting depreciation, the following two conditions should be satisfied: (i) The asset in question should be owned by the assessee; and (ii) The asset should

SHRI KISHOREBHAI BHIKHABHAI VIRANI,,SURAT vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, BHAVNAGAR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2299/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2299/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 Kishorkumar Bhikhabhai Virani, D.C.I.T., 57, Adarsh Society, Vs. Circle 1, Atawa Lines, Ahmedabad. Surat-395001. Pan: Aawpv1516G

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr.D.R
Section 10(38)Section 2(14)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

161/- to the total income of the assessee vide order dated 8 December 2017. 3.2 The AO in the assessment order has also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The AO finally has confirmed the penalty of Rs. 55,51,059/- being

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. APPLITECH SOLUTIONS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2004/AHD/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Dec 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kshatriya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 143Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

161/- 2. Disallowance of Interest Expenses 21,12,514/- 3. Disallowance of expenses related to increase in Share Capital 1,59,028/- 4. Disallowance out of Claim of Bad-Debts 308,76,140/- 5. Late payment of E.S.I /P.P. in the Govt. a/c. 37,440-/- 2.1 Penalty notice u/s 274 r.w.s.271(1)(c) of the Act was issued on 26/12/2006

SHRI ASHISHBHAI NATWARLAL SOPARKAR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 517/AHD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 517/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2016-17 Shri Ashishbhai Natwarlal Soparkar, A.C.I.T., Lane 13, Bunglow No.246, Vs. Circle-3(3), Satyagrah Chhavni, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Ms Urvashi Sodhan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 94(7)

section 271(1)(c) have to be invoked. Thus, if we apply this logic, then any addition/disallowance made by the AO in the assessment would lead either to concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. In other words the assessee furnishes the particulars of income in his income tax return which is subsequently verified by the revenue

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. , BARODA

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

ITA 1519/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Advocate & Shri Parin Shah
Section 10Section 115JSection 28

1. SUPPLY AND PURCHASE ARRANGEMENTS. SPIL hereby agrees to sell and supply the Products to SGI and SPGI hereby agrees to Purchase the Products from SPIL with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. It is understood by the parties that this Agreement in no way obliges SPGI to purchase or take any or all the said products

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

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

ITA 1462/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Advocate & Shri Parin Shah
Section 10Section 115JSection 28

1. SUPPLY AND PURCHASE ARRANGEMENTS. SPIL hereby agrees to sell and supply the Products to SGI and SPGI hereby agrees to Purchase the Products from SPIL with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. It is understood by the parties that this Agreement in no way obliges SPGI to purchase or take any or all the said products

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

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

ITA 1463/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Advocate & Shri Parin Shah
Section 10Section 115JSection 28

1. SUPPLY AND PURCHASE ARRANGEMENTS. SPIL hereby agrees to sell and supply the Products to SGI and SPGI hereby agrees to Purchase the Products from SPIL with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. It is understood by the parties that this Agreement in no way obliges SPGI to purchase or take any or all the said products