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.

6 results for “disallowance”+ Section 56(2)(viia)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai206Bangalore82Delhi78Chennai66Hyderabad24Pune19Visakhapatnam17Kolkata15Cochin14Jaipur13Indore12Nagpur9Chandigarh9Surat8Cuttack8Ahmedabad6Jodhpur6Varanasi6Rajkot4Allahabad2Amritsar2SC2Patna1Karnataka1Agra1Guwahati1Raipur1

Key Topics

Section 80P(2)(d)7Section 43B6Addition to Income6Section 36(1)(viia)5Deduction5Disallowance5Section 143(3)4Section 40A(3)4Section 14A3

MEHSANA TALUKA MADHYAMIK TEACHERS CREDIT & CONSUMERS SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO, WARD-2, PRESENT WARD-1, MEHSANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Ms. Madhumita Roy (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Hasmukh V. Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R. &
Section 57Section 80Section 80P(2)(d)

56 of IT Act. Total tax effect 2,93,286/-“ 3. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT-A erred in confirming the order of the AO by sustaining the disallowance of the deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act with respect to the interest income from

GUJARAT INFRAPIPES PVT. LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA

Section 572
Section 50C2
Depreciation2

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

ITA 813/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR and Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 50C

viia) and 56(2)(vilb) of Income-tax Act in the statute with effect from 01/06/2010 and 01.04.2013 respectively, but any other gift by companies or any other person other than individual and HUF still left outside the tax net. Therefore, the amount received by the assessee is not taxable as gift u/s. 56 of Income

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. M/S. GUJARAT INFRA PIPES PVT. LTD.,, VADODARA

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

ITA 987/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR and Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 50C

viia) and 56(2)(vilb) of Income-tax Act in the statute with effect from 01/06/2010 and 01.04.2013 respectively, but any other gift by companies or any other person other than individual and HUF still left outside the tax net. Therefore, the amount received by the assessee is not taxable as gift u/s. 56 of Income

THE UTTAR GUJARAT UMA CO.OP.CREDIT SOC. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-6(1)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1670/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1670 & 1671/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 2015-16)

For Respondent: Shri L. P. Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 56Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

viia) of the Act by Finance Act, 2006 and such principles thus no longer serve as strict guiding principle to test the relief eligible under S. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Therefore, the plea raised on behalf of the Revenue towards absence of principle of mutuality in such deposits with co-operative banks is a damp squib. Thus

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, RACE COURSE CIRCLE, VADODARA vs. THE BHARUCH DIST. CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LIMITED, BHARUCH

ITA 693/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Rignesh K Das, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Manish J. Shah & Shri Rushin Patel, A.Rs
Section 36(1)(viia)

56,42,050/-. The assessee, a co-operative bank registered with relevant authorities, claimed a deduction of Rs. 2,88,40,841/- under section 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act for bad and doubtful debts. In response to inquiries about this deduction, the assessee submitted that as a co-operative bank, it qualified for specific deductions under

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1 NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 311/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedsl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 311/Ahd/2016 2010-11 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 2. 2176/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 3. 2173/Ahd/2016 2011-12 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 4. 165/Ahd/2017 2012-13 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 5. 287/Ahd/2017 2012-13 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 6-7 520 & 2013-14 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., 521/Ahd/2018 & Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 8-9 604 & 605/ 2013-14 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Ahd/2018 & Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Smt. Urvashi Shodhan, and Shri Parin Shah,For Respondent: Shri Anshu Prakash, CIT.DR
Section 14A

viia). 3.9 It is further submitted that this addition is only timing difference based addition, tax- neutral over two years and hence ought to be cancelled in view of Hon. SC judgement in the case of Excel Industries Limited 358 ITR 295 (SC), since the Bank has already recognized and offered to tox/consider the same during