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.

366 results for “disallowance”+ Section 36(1)(va)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,243Mumbai809Kolkata544Bangalore440Chennai404Ahmedabad366Jaipur354Pune302Hyderabad209Chandigarh191Raipur136Indore132Visakhapatnam104Amritsar99Surat92Nagpur86Jodhpur76Cuttack72Agra66Lucknow62Cochin60Guwahati47Rajkot32Jabalpur20Ranchi16Karnataka15Varanasi12Patna10Allahabad8Panaji8Dehradun7SC5Telangana4Rajasthan3Calcutta2Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Disallowance82Section 143(3)79Addition to Income72Section 14A67Section 36(1)(va)59Section 43B43Deduction39Section 80I36Depreciation35Section 143(1)

JAI PRAKASH CHOUDHARY,VADODARA vs. THE ADIT CPC, BENGLURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 312/AHD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(va)

36(1)(va) of the Act cannot be disallowed u/s 143(1) of the Act (more specifically under sub-clause (d) to 143(1) of the Act). Secondly, the counsel argued that the issue at the time when the disallowance was made, issue was debatable and accordingly could not be the subject matter of disallowance under section

Showing 1–20 of 366 · Page 1 of 19

...
31
Section 115J29
Section 143(2)21

JAI PRAKASH CHOUDHARY,VADODARA vs. THE ADIT CPC, BENGLURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 311/AHD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(va)

36(1)(va) of the Act cannot be disallowed u/s 143(1) of the Act (more specifically under sub-clause (d) to 143(1) of the Act). Secondly, the counsel argued that the issue at the time when the disallowance was made, issue was debatable and accordingly could not be the subject matter of disallowance under section

JAIPRAKASH CHOUDHARY,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 310/AHD/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(va)

36(1)(va) of the Act cannot be disallowed u/s 143(1) of the Act (more specifically under sub-clause (d) to 143(1) of the Act). Secondly, the counsel argued that the issue at the time when the disallowance was made, issue was debatable and accordingly could not be the subject matter of disallowance under section

THE MEHSANA URBAN CO. OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE , MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITANo

ITA 144/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

disallowance of alleged delayed deposit of employees contribution to ESI/PF in terms of the provisions of section 36(1)(va

THE MEHSANA URBAN CO. OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE , MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITANo

ITA 146/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

disallowance of alleged delayed deposit of employees contribution to ESI/PF in terms of the provisions of section 36(1)(va

THE MEHSANA URBAN CO. OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE , MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITANo

ITA 145/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

disallowance of alleged delayed deposit of employees contribution to ESI/PF in terms of the provisions of section 36(1)(va

THE ANUP ENGINEERING LTD.(MERGED WITH ANVESHAH HEAVY ENGI. LTD),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT CPC, BANGLORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 444/AHD/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2018-19 The Anup Engineering Ltd. Dcit, Cpc, (Merged With Anveshah Heavy Vs Bangalore. Engineering Ltd.) Nr.66 Kv Power Station Odhav Road, Odhav, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaqca 0309 R

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “the Act”) but paid within the due date of filing of the return under section 139(1) of the Act, and that the impugned disallowance

SANKALP RECREATION PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

ITA 576/AHD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate &For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR &
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153ASection 36(1)(va)Section 69C

disallowed these payments under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SANKALP RECREATION PVT. LTD., AHMEDABAD

ITA 569/AHD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate &For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR &
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153ASection 36(1)(va)Section 69C

disallowed these payments under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment

SUPER SEEDS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Number 2 of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 260/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Of The Final Hearing Of Appeal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr. D.R
Section 35Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance u/s. 2(24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) and added a sum of Rs. 91,215/- with the following observations: “From a plain of clause (b) of section

M/S. M M VORA AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CPC , BANGLORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 100/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Hearing Of The Appeal.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act i.e. due dates as prescribed under section 36(1)(va) of the Act and the actual

M/S. CHECKMATE SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ADIT, CPC, BANGALORE PRESENT JURIDICTION THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), , VADODARA

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 69/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 69/Ahd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20) िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. Checkmate Adit, Cpc, बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Services Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore Vs. G.F 6-9, Amaan Tower & Suvas Colony, Fatehgunj, Dy.Cit Vadodara, Gujarat, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara 390002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc8465A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri M. R. Sahu, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit. Dr 12/07/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 16/07/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 08.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Had Filed Its Return Of Income For A.Y. 2019-20 On 30.09.2019 Declaring Total

For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

section 36(1)(va), the deduction of the same would not be available to the assessee. 13. So far as merits of the disallowance

TEKNI ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1855/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumarshri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Adjournment ApplicationFor Respondent: Shri V K Mangla, Sr. DR
Section 14(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

disallowance under section 36(1)(iv) instead of section 36(1)(va) as per the intimation u/s. 143(1). It is also

S.A.L. STEEL LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1217/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2017AY 2011-12
Section 2Section 234Section 234BSection 28Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

section 36(1)(va). Consequently, it was held that learned tribunal had erred in deleting respective disallowances being employees’ contribution

DIVERSIFIED SERVICES,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 55/AHD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 May 2022AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Dipak R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Agarwal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance made by the CPC u/s 143(1) of the I.T. Act on account of appellant's failure to pay the employee's contribution of PF/ESI of Rs.8,85,284/- within the prescribed due dates as per section 36(1)(va

SABRI CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA

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

ITA 1019/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1019/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Sabri Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Acit, बनाम/ A/2/236, Gidc, Nandesari, Circle 2(1)(1), Vs. Baroda – 391 340. Baroda. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccs 9406 K .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri M. J. Shah, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By:

For Appellant: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: 04/10/2018
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(2)

1)(va) of the I.T Act, 1961. 2. The Learned C.I.T(Appeals) erred in law and facts in upholding the disallowance of the advance written off Rs, 200000/- made u/s 36(2) and alternatively u/s 28 without appreciating the provisions of the section

ORIENTAL ENTERPRISE PRIVATE LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

ITA 661/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Natha Bhalekar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

36(1)(va) - addition, referencing Late Payment the Supreme Court's of Employee’s decision in Checkmate Contribution Services (P.) Ltd v. CIT, to Provident which clarifies that Fund (PF) employees' contributions must be paid within the due dates specified under the respective Acts . 2 Addition u/s Rs. 1,35,94,166/- The CIT(A) deleted this Revenue

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA vs. ORIENTAL ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,, PCC NOTIFIED AREA

ITA 732/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Natha Bhalekar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

36(1)(va) - addition, referencing Late Payment the Supreme Court's of Employee’s decision in Checkmate Contribution Services (P.) Ltd v. CIT, to Provident which clarifies that Fund (PF) employees' contributions must be paid within the due dates specified under the respective Acts . 2 Addition u/s Rs. 1,35,94,166/- The CIT(A) deleted this Revenue

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA vs. ORIENTAL ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, PCC NOTIFIED AREA

ITA 807/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Natha Bhalekar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

36(1)(va) - addition, referencing Late Payment the Supreme Court's of Employee’s decision in Checkmate Contribution Services (P.) Ltd v. CIT, to Provident which clarifies that Fund (PF) employees' contributions must be paid within the due dates specified under the respective Acts . 2 Addition u/s Rs. 1,35,94,166/- The CIT(A) deleted this Revenue

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. SCHAEFFLER INDIA LTD.( ERSTWHILE LUK INDIA PVT. LTD)), VADODARA

ITA 299/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT D.R. & Smt
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

disallowance under section 143(1)(a) was valid in view of Supreme Court's decision in case of Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. (supra) and the assessee will not be entitled to deduction of belated payment of ESI and PF of employees' share of contribution as per provisions of section 36(1)(va