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.

159 results for “disallowance”+ Section 69Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai650Delhi512Jaipur192Ahmedabad159Chennai156Bangalore149Kolkata124Hyderabad121Rajkot87Chandigarh82Cochin70Surat66Indore59Pune59Lucknow39Nagpur36Amritsar35Agra32Visakhapatnam31Raipur24Jodhpur23Patna21Cuttack17Allahabad16Guwahati10Dehradun7Varanasi6Jabalpur5Ranchi4Karnataka3Panaji3Rajasthan1Kerala1SC1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 69A80Addition to Income80Section 143(3)69Section 14762Section 26354Section 14847Section 80I43Disallowance35Cash Deposit34Section 68

M/S. ARIHANT JEWELS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2341/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Feb 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D, if such income is not covered under clause (a) the income-tax payable shall be the aggregate of (i) The amount of income-tax calculated on the income referred to an clause (a) and clause(b), at the rate of sixty percent; and (ii) The amount of income-tax with which

HARISHKUMAR KHUSHALRAY BHATT,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(2) NOW WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Showing 1–20 of 159 · Page 1 of 8

...
27
Section 153A25
Reopening of Assessment21
ITA 2042/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Harishkumar Khushalray Bhatt Ito, Ward-3(3)(2) P/1, Chandragupta Apartment Vs. Ahmedabad. Nr. Gordhandas Patel Hospital Vastrapur Ahmedabad. Pan : Abspb 3786 F (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Pritesh L. Shah, Ar : Shri Uday Kishanrao Kakne, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Pritesh L. Shah, AR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 68Section 69ASection 80G

sections 69A and 68, the estimation of net profit, and the disallowance of donation under section 80G. The CIT(A) confirmed

MAHENDRA PATEL BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1217/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2025AY 2020-21
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69A

Section 69A and disallowed life insurance premiums paid for directors under Section 37(1). Additionally, disallowance was made for delayed

SADBHAV ENGINEERING LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), AHMEDABAD, DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed\nand that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 235/AHD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2025AY 2018-19
For Respondent: \nShri H. Phani Raju, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 69ASection 80I

disallowance be restricted to 12.5% of the bogus purchase\nexpenses.\n67. ISSUE NO.4 REGARDING TREATMENT OF ALLEGED BOGUS\nSUB-CONTRACT EXPENSES UNDER SECTION 69A

RAMESHKUMAR G. PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(5) PRESENT JURISDICTION ITO, WARD-3(1)(2), VADODARA

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

ITA 397/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2025AY 2013-14
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 274

section 69A was sustained. On disallowance of\nRs.9,32,142/-, the CIT(A) held that the applicability of section 44AD

SHALIGRAM INFRA PROJECTS LLP ( LTD. LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP),AHMEDABAD vs. THE JCIT (OSD), CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

Appeals are partly allowed

ITA 233/AHD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarit(Ss)A No.167/Ahd/2021 Asstt.Year : 2017-18 & Asst.Year : 2018-19 Shaligram Infra Projects Llp Vs. The Jcit (Osd) 4Th Floor, Office No.401-402 Central Cir.2(2) B/H. Dishman House Ahmedabad. Opp: Sankalp Grace Ii, Ambli Ahmedabad. Pan: Acpfs 7047 A It(Ss)A No.194,195 & 196/Ahd/2021 Asstt.Year : 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & Asst.Year : 2018-19 The Jcit (Osd) Vs. Shaligram Infra Projects Llp Central Cir.2(2) 4Th Floor, Office No.401-402 Ahmedabad. B/H. Dishman House Opp: Sankalp Grace Ii, Ambli Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

69A provided Disallowance of Interest @15% paid to related 3,61,700 interest u/s parties vs. 9–12% to others; 40A(2)(b) excess 3% disallowed 15.7 The assessee preferred appeals before CIT(A) against the orders of Assessing Officer In case of A.Y. 2017-18 and A.Y. 2018-19. The ld. CIT(A) carefully examined the seized documents, statements

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SHALIGRAM INFRA PROJECTS LLP , AHMEDABAD

Appeals are partly allowed

ITA 291/AHD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Sept 2025AY 2018-19
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

section\n40A(2)(b) was made on the ground that the assessee had paid interest at\n15% to related parties while to others it had paid only 9%-12%. Treating\n12% as fair, the AO disallowed the excess 3%.\n15.6 Tabulated summary of additions is given below:\n\nA.Y.\nNature of\nAddition\nBasis of Addition\nAmount\n(Rs.)\n2017

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

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act for these assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18. Therefore, following the ruling of Apex Court, the additions made by the AO for AY 2013-14 to 2017- 18 under section 36(1)(va) of the Act are hereby directed to be deleted. 17.1. As the assessment year

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

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act for these assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18. Therefore, following the ruling of Apex Court, the additions made by the AO for AY 2013-14 to 2017- 18 under section 36(1)(va) of the Act are hereby directed to be deleted. 17.1. As the assessment year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. MONARCH NETWORTH CAPITAL LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly\ndismissed as not pressed.\n17. In the combined result, all three appeals filed by the Revenue for\nA.Ys.2013–14, 2014–15 and 2015–16 are dismissed

ITA 961/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: \nShrti Bandish Soparkar, AR &For Respondent: \nShri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

disallowance of brought forward loss was made without adequate\nopportunity or justification and required verification.\n5.2. Accordingly, the CIT(A) deleted the additions made under section 69A

MANISH RANJAN, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. MONARCH NETWORTH CAPITAL LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, the ground raised by the Revenue for A.Y. 2015–16 is dismissed

ITA 960/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shrti Bandish Soparkar, AR &For Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

disallowance of brought forward loss was made without adequate opportunity or justification and required verification. 5.2. Accordingly, the CIT(A) deleted the additions made under section 69A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. MONARCH NETWORTH CAPITAL LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly\ndismissed as not pressed.\n17. In the combined result, all three appeals filed by the Revenue for\nA.Ys.2013–14, 2014–15 and 2015–16 are dismissed

ITA 962/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nShrti Bandish Soparkar, AR &For Respondent: \nShri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

disallowance of brought forward loss was made without adequate\nopportunity or justification and required verification.\n5.2.\nAccordingly, the CIT(A) deleted the additions made under section 69A

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2308/AHD/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. ParinFor Respondent: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80I

disallowance , and consequently deduction under section 80IA(4) will also go up . The ld. Sr. DR, Shri Chetram Meena submitted that this contention raised by the ld. Senior Advocate is not raised in the grounds of CO filed by the assessee with ITAT , that the amount added to the income of the assessee will lead to the increase in deduction

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2352/AHD/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Apr 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. ParinFor Respondent: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80I

disallowance , and consequently deduction under section 80IA(4) will also go up . The ld. Sr. DR, Shri Chetram Meena submitted that this contention raised by the ld. Senior Advocate is not raised in the grounds of CO filed by the assessee with ITAT , that the amount added to the income of the assessee will lead to the increase in deduction

KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.(OSD),CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2357/AHD/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Apr 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. ParinFor Respondent: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80I

disallowance , and consequently deduction under section 80IA(4) will also go up . The ld. Sr. DR, Shri Chetram Meena submitted that this contention raised by the ld. Senior Advocate is not raised in the grounds of CO filed by the assessee with ITAT , that the amount added to the income of the assessee will lead to the increase in deduction

SHAILESHKUMAR DAHYABHAI PATEL,VADODARA, GUJARAT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1)(2) (NOW DCIT CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, GUJARAT, VADODARA, GUJARAT

In the result, Ground Number 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 2131/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta & Shri Bhavin Marfatia, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 234BSection 234CSection 270ASection 271ASection 272A(1)(b)Section 6Section 68Section 69ASection 69C

disallowed excess interest of ₹35,21,790/-. The Assessing Officer also noticed a mismatch in advances received from Shri Pathik D. Vachhani resulting in an unexplained amount of ₹2,39,752/-. As the assessee did not offer any explanation or supporting evidence, this amount was treated as unexplained income under section 69A

KARTIK CLOTHING & FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed

ITA 119/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 69A

section 69A of the Act. Further, it was submitted that it is a well settled law that denial of opportunity of cross examination also renders the assessment order bad in law. 6. In response, the Ld. DR placed reliance on the observations made by the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(Appeals) in their respective orders. 7. We have heard

ALDIABLOS INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 355/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 68Section 69A

Sections\n69, 69A, and disallowance of expenses and liabilities, along with initiation of\npenalty proceedings.\n8.1 The assessee has challenged

AGNEE GAS AGENCY,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 1604/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nआयकर अपील सं/ITA No.1604/Ahd/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18\nAgnee Gas Agency\n13, Sukhram Chambers\nKhodiarnagar Char Rasta\nBapunagar\nAhmedabad - 380 024\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AAHFA 7561 M\nThe Income Tax Officer\nबनाम /\nWard-5(3)(3)\nv/s.\nAhmedabad\nअपीलार्थी/ (Appellant)\nप्रत्यर्थी / (Respondent)\nAssessee by:\nHardik Vora office\nRevenue by:\nShri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR\nसुनवाई क

For Appellant: \nHardik Vora officeFor Respondent: \nShri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234ASection 271ASection 44ASection 69A

disallowance of expenses (20%) - Rs.3,71,556/-\n• Addition under section 69A of the Act (8% of demonetized deposits) - Rs.11

ACIT CC 2(3) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. AISHA DHIRAJ GOGIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result: 50. To summarize the final outcome:

ITA 1673/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha["ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी नरे" साद िस!ा, लेखा सद" के सम#।]

Disallowance of exemption claimed on Long Term Capital Gains under section 10(38) of the Act, treating the underlying shares as "penny stocks"; and (iv) Addition on account of alleged on-money received on the sale of property in the Earth Erita project. These additions were made based on material allegedly found during the search action, including digital data like