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.

267 results for “disallowance”+ Section 274clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,523Delhi1,022Bangalore359Ahmedabad267Chennai238Jaipur236Kolkata186Pune164Raipur118Indore98Surat96Hyderabad93Chandigarh84Allahabad41Lucknow34Rajkot31Visakhapatnam31Guwahati30Amritsar28Cuttack26Ranchi26Cochin23Karnataka19Agra18Nagpur15Panaji11SC10Telangana8Jodhpur7Calcutta5Dehradun5Jabalpur3Rajasthan2Punjab & Haryana2Varanasi2

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)112Addition to Income67Disallowance64Section 143(3)60Penalty47Section 14837Section 14A35Section 14732Section 3730Section 263

GUJARAT STATE FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1226/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 135(5)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 80GSection 80G(2)(a)

disallowed by the assessee under Section 37 of the Act and added to the income. However, as contribution to Mukhyamantri Shree Swachchta Nidhi Gujarat was eligible for deduction under Section 80G of the Act, the assessee had claimed deduction of 50% of the contribution amounting to Rs.1,78,71,274

Showing 1–20 of 267 · Page 1 of 14

...
28
Deduction26
Section 143(1)24

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

ITA 477/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36Section 68Section 80G

disallowed the same and added it to the total income. The AO also recorded that despite giving multiple opportunities, the assessee could not substantiate the entry with supporting documents, thereby furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) read with section 274

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 120/AHD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2009-10 Dcit, M/S. Adani Enterprises Ltd., Circle 1(1)(1), Vs Adani House, Nr. Mithakhali Ahmedabad Six Roads, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad - 380009 Pan : Aabca 2804 L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Mohd. Usman, Cit-Dr Assessee By : Shri Vartik Choksi, Ar & Shri Biren Shah, Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 11/05/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2022

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, AR &For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

disallowances made by the Assessing Officer and while disposing of the said appeal vide an order dated 08.10.2014, the leaned CIT(A) allowed part relief to the assessee thereby sustaining/confirming certain additions/disallowances made by the Assessing Officer. After the disposal of the quantum appeal by the learned CIT(A), a fresh notice under Section 274

THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VADODARA vs. PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD., VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

ITA 529/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: \nMs. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: \nShri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36Section 68Section 80G

274/-), in addition to other investments generating exempt income.\nA show cause notice was issued requiring the assessee to explain why\ndisallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D should not be made. In\nreply, the assessee submitted a breakup of interest expenses and claimed\nthat investments yielding exempt income were made from its own funds,\nthus attracting no disallowance

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN GRANITO INDIA LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1517/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ankit Talsania, A.RFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Sharma, C.I.T.DR
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

disallowance of the expense is warranted under section 115BJB of the Act. Hence the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. The 2nd issue raised by the Revenue is that the learned CIT (A) erred in 8. deleting the addition made by the AO for Rs. 14,06,42,330/- on account of suppression of production/sales after rejecting

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN GRANITO INDIA LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2451/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Ankit Talsania, A.RFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Sharma, C.I.T.DR
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

disallowance of the expense is warranted under section 115BJB of the Act. Hence the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. The 2nd issue raised by the Revenue is that the learned CIT (A) erred in 8. deleting the addition made by the AO for Rs. 14,06,42,330/- on account of suppression of production/sales after rejecting

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. MOHAMMEDARIF IBRAHIMBHAI SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

ITA 962/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod M Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT DR &For Respondent: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 147

Section 40 A(3) the alternate plea raised by the appellant has not been adjudicated upon. In my opinion the case of live stock exporter is on much more stronger looting than that of a dealer in meat. ITA Nos.1115 & 962/Ahd/2019 & CO No.10/Ahd/2022(in ITA No. 1115/A/19) Asst. Years –2012-13 & 2014-15 10.6 Further, remand report as submitted

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. MOHAMMEDARIF IBRAHIMBHAI SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1115/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod M Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT DR &For Respondent: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 147

Section 40 A(3) the alternate plea raised by the appellant has not been adjudicated upon. In my opinion the case of live stock exporter is on much more stronger looting than that of a dealer in meat. ITA Nos.1115 & 962/Ahd/2019 & CO No.10/Ahd/2022(in ITA No. 1115/A/19) Asst. Years –2012-13 & 2014-15 10.6 Further, remand report as submitted

INJECT CARE PARENTERALS PVT. LTD.,VAPI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 739/AHD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 739/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 Inject Care Parenterals Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T., Plot No.130, Gidc, Vs. Circle-2(1)(1), Vapi, Ahmedabad. Gujarart.

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Dileep Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 36Section 36(1)(v)Section 37Section 43B

274 read Asstt. Year 2010-11 3 with section 271(1)(c) of the Act, dated 15-03-2013 proposing the penalty for the additions as discussed above. 4. The assessee in response to such notice made its submission as elaborated below: a. Regarding the disallowance

SHRI GIRISHBHAI M.PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,MEHSANA CIRCLE,, MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 337/AHD/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 337/Ahd/2014 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2005-2006 Girishbhai M. Patel, A.C.I.T., 4, Regent Park, Vs. Mehsana Circle, Vanza Co-Operative Society, Mehsana. Part-Ii, Near Judges Bungalow, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Abypp8093M

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(22)(e)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Disallowance of insurance amount claimed Rs.40,184/- Rs.24,27,511/- Total Income Rs.32,47,959/- i.e Rs.32,47,960/- 4.1 The AO in the assessment order has recorded to have issued penalty notice under section 274

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. NIRMA CHEMICALS WORKS PVT.LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1208/AHD/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act on account of diversion of interest-bearing fund for non- commercial purposes. 30. The AO during the assessment proceedings found that the assessee on one hand is incurring huge interest expenses on the borrowed fund and on the other hand it has given interest free loans and advances to the tune

NIRMA CHEMICALS WORKS PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1056/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act on account of diversion of interest-bearing fund for non- commercial purposes. 30. The AO during the assessment proceedings found that the assessee on one hand is incurring huge interest expenses on the borrowed fund and on the other hand it has given interest free loans and advances to the tune

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. NIRMA CHEMICALS WORKS PVT.LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1600/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act on account of diversion of interest-bearing fund for non- commercial purposes. 30. The AO during the assessment proceedings found that the assessee on one hand is incurring huge interest expenses on the borrowed fund and on the other hand it has given interest free loans and advances to the tune

NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1190/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act on account of diversion of interest-bearing fund for non- commercial purposes. 30. The AO during the assessment proceedings found that the assessee on one hand is incurring huge interest expenses on the borrowed fund and on the other hand it has given interest free loans and advances to the tune

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. NIRMA CHEMICALS WORKS PVT.LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1209/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act on account of diversion of interest-bearing fund for non- commercial purposes. 30. The AO during the assessment proceedings found that the assessee on one hand is incurring huge interest expenses on the borrowed fund and on the other hand it has given interest free loans and advances to the tune

NIRMA CHEMICALS WORKS PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1057/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act on account of diversion of interest-bearing fund for non- commercial purposes. 30. The AO during the assessment proceedings found that the assessee on one hand is incurring huge interest expenses on the borrowed fund and on the other hand it has given interest free loans and advances to the tune

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CIMS HOSPITAL PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal is partly allowed and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 3299/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 15Section 2(24)(x)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 44B

disallowance made under section 14A r.w.r. 8D cannot be resorted while determining the expenses as mentioned under clause (f) to explanation 1 to section 115JB of the Act. Hence we delete such addition. 19. In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No.3213/Ahd/2016 is partly allowed. 20. ITA No. 3299/Ahd/2016 for A.Y. 2012-13 : Revenue has filed following grounds

CIMS HOSPITAL PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

Appeal is partly allowed and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 3213/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 15Section 2(24)(x)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 44B

disallowance made under section 14A r.w.r. 8D cannot be resorted while determining the expenses as mentioned under clause (f) to explanation 1 to section 115JB of the Act. Hence we delete such addition. 19. In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No.3213/Ahd/2016 is partly allowed. 20. ITA No. 3299/Ahd/2016 for A.Y. 2012-13 : Revenue has filed following grounds

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1741/AHD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

274 of the Act by the Assessing Officer in standard printed form without striking out irrelevant clause and without explicitly specifying the exact charge on which penalty is to be levied is bad in law and ought to be set aside altogether. 3. Deduction of remuneration received from partnership firm under section 115JB 3.1 The Id. CIT(A) grossly erred

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1750/AHD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

274 of the Act by the Assessing Officer in standard printed form without striking out irrelevant clause and without explicitly specifying the exact charge on which penalty is to be levied is bad in law and ought to be set aside altogether. 3. Deduction of remuneration received from partnership firm under section 115JB 3.1 The Id. CIT(A) grossly erred