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.

149 results for “disallowance”+ Section 801clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai634Delhi506Kolkata171Ahmedabad149Bangalore113Chennai104Jaipur95Hyderabad54Pune51Allahabad39Calcutta38Visakhapatnam25Indore24Lucknow22Chandigarh21Nagpur19Guwahati18Surat17Rajkot16Cuttack13Jodhpur11Ranchi10Agra7SC5Dehradun4Amritsar4Raipur3Panaji3Jabalpur2Punjab & Haryana1Karnataka1Cochin1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Telangana1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Patna1Kerala1

Key Topics

Addition to Income65Disallowance65Section 143(3)55Section 80I48Deduction33Section 6832Section 14A26Section 4021Depreciation20Section 271(1)(c)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED, VADODARA

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

ITA 293/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The facts of the case of Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd vs. DCIT and the facts of the case of the petitioner are identical and not different and as such, the Tribunal could not have relied upon the decision of Orissa High Court while distinguishing the facts of the case of the petitioner

THE JT.CIT, (OSD)CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD., VADODARA

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

Showing 1–20 of 149 · Page 1 of 8

...
19
Penalty17
Section 115J15
ITA 223/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The facts of the case of Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd vs. DCIT and the facts of the case of the petitioner are identical and not different and as such, the Tribunal could not have relied upon the decision of Orissa High Court while distinguishing the facts of the case of the petitioner

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 231/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The facts of the case of Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd vs. DCIT and the facts of the case of the petitioner are identical and not different and as such, the Tribunal could not have relied upon the decision of Orissa High Court while distinguishing the facts of the case of the petitioner

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 166/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The facts of the case of Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd vs. DCIT and the facts of the case of the petitioner are identical and not different and as such, the Tribunal could not have relied upon the decision of Orissa High Court while distinguishing the facts of the case of the petitioner

M/S. E-INFOCHIPS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ground number 3 and 4 of the assessee’s appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 417/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Dec 2022AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 271

disallowances made under section 14A read with rule 8D could not be applied to provision of section 115JB of the Act. The Delhi ITAT in the case of Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd [2017] 82 taxmann.com 415 (Delhi - Trib.) (SB) held that computation under clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2), is to be made without resorting to computation

ELECTRONIC INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROL PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, these grounds of assessee’s appeal are partly allowed

ITA 2837/AHD/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: RespondentbyFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr.D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

section 801..of the Income Tax Act…” Taking into consideration the entire aspect of the matter, the case made out by the assessee, the documents in support of such claim on record before us and respectfully relying on the ratio laid down on this issue of allowability of supervision charges by the Jurisdiction High Court, we find no alternative

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ZAVERI & COMPANY PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1193/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Surendra kumar, CIT-DR and
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263

disallowance by applying sub-section 5 of section 80IA and computing the quantum of deduction u/s.80IA after deduction of notional brought forward losses. The appellant has contended that there were no such brought forward losses in its case since the same had already been set off in earlier years against the income of other undertakings of the appellant

M/S. ZAVERI & CO. PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1081/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Surendra kumar, CIT-DR and
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263

disallowance by applying sub-section 5 of section 80IA and computing the quantum of deduction u/s.80IA after deduction of notional brought forward losses. The appellant has contended that there were no such brought forward losses in its case since the same had already been set off in earlier years against the income of other undertakings of the appellant

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ZAVERI & COMPANY PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1194/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Surendra kumar, CIT-DR and
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263

disallowance by applying sub-section 5 of section 80IA and computing the quantum of deduction u/s.80IA after deduction of notional brought forward losses. The appellant has contended that there were no such brought forward losses in its case since the same had already been set off in earlier years against the income of other undertakings of the appellant

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 365/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Axis Bank Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Opp. Income-Tax, Samartheshwar Temple, Nr. Law Circle 1(1)(1), Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380006 Pan : Aaacu 2414 K अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2023/03.04.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 10.04.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee-Appellant Has Challenged Correctness Of The Order Dated 28Th July, 2022 Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act” For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. 2. Ground No.1 Raised By The Assessee Reads As Under:- “1. Disallowance In Respect Of Annual Technical Fees (Tax Effect - Rs. 16,84,276) 1.1 The Learned Drp Has Erred In Upholding Addition Made By Ao In Respect Of Treating Annual Technical Services (Ats) Fees Paid To Infosys Limited To The Extent Of Rs. 48.66 Lacs As Prior Period Expense. 1.2. It Is Submitted That The Expenditure Relates To Amount Payable To Infosys & No Part Of The Amount Was Claimed As Expenditure At Any Time In The 2 Axis Bank Limited Vs. Acit Ay : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C

disallowance of expenses pertaining to the earning of exempt income, in terms of the provisions of Section 14A of the Act. The assessee had earned exempt income of Rs.375,64,72,801

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-1,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 929/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin Shah, ArsFor Respondent: Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR
Section 92B

section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of certain expenses. 30. The assessee during the year has incurred total research and development expenses amounting to Rs. 11,962.75 lacs. But the assessee claimed weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of the expenses amounting to Rs. 11,271.35 lacs only. As such the assessee omitted

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

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1237/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin Shah, ArsFor Respondent: Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR
Section 92B

section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of certain expenses. 30. The assessee during the year has incurred total research and development expenses amounting to Rs. 11,962.75 lacs. But the assessee claimed weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of the expenses amounting to Rs. 11,271.35 lacs only. As such the assessee omitted

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 922/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin Shah, ArsFor Respondent: Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR
Section 92B

section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of certain expenses. 30. The assessee during the year has incurred total research and development expenses amounting to Rs. 11,962.75 lacs. But the assessee claimed weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of the expenses amounting to Rs. 11,271.35 lacs only. As such the assessee omitted

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1234/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin Shah, ArsFor Respondent: Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR
Section 92B

section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of certain expenses. 30. The assessee during the year has incurred total research and development expenses amounting to Rs. 11,962.75 lacs. But the assessee claimed weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of the expenses amounting to Rs. 11,271.35 lacs only. As such the assessee omitted

KALPATARU POWER TRANSMISSION LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY. CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2471/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jul 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 92C

Section 14A by the Finance (Amendment) Act, 2001 but also made it retrospective, i.e., 1962 when the Income Tax Act itself came into force. The aforesaid intent was expressed loudly and clearly in the Memorandum I.T.A No. 2471 & 2853/Ahd/2017 & Ors. A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Page No 20 Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. . vs. DCIT explaining the provisions of the Finance

THE DY. CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S. KALPARATRU POWER TRANSMISSION LIMITED,, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2853/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jul 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 92C

Section 14A by the Finance (Amendment) Act, 2001 but also made it retrospective, i.e., 1962 when the Income Tax Act itself came into force. The aforesaid intent was expressed loudly and clearly in the Memorandum I.T.A No. 2471 & 2853/Ahd/2017 & Ors. A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Page No 20 Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. . vs. DCIT explaining the provisions of the Finance

KALPATARU POWER TRANSMISSION LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY. CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2472/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jul 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 92C

Section 14A by the Finance (Amendment) Act, 2001 but also made it retrospective, i.e., 1962 when the Income Tax Act itself came into force. The aforesaid intent was expressed loudly and clearly in the Memorandum I.T.A No. 2471 & 2853/Ahd/2017 & Ors. A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Page No 20 Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. . vs. DCIT explaining the provisions of the Finance

GOLD FINCH JEWELLERY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1075/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1075-1076/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2009-2010 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T. Gold Finch Jewellery Ltd., Circle-2(1)(1), G-5,Pariseema Complex, Vs. Ahmedabad-380015 Nr. Swagat Cross Roads, C.G. Road, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacg6992L

For Respondent: Shri VinodTanwani, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer for labour expenses of Rs. 7,03,801/- being 25% of the total labour expenses of Rs. 28,15,202/- The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or modify any of the grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing of appeal. ITA nos.1075 & 1076/AHD/2016 Asstt. Years

M/S. EDELWEISS BROKING LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2021/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Wassem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2021/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Edelweiss Broking Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ (On Behalf Of Amalgamating Cricle-1(3), Vs. 1St Floor, B-109, Company, Edelweiss Financial Advisors Ltd.) Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Nr. 801-804, 8Th Floor, Abhishree Panjrapole, Ambawadi, Avenue, Opp. Hanumanji Ahmedabad-380015 Temple, Nehrunagar, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce9421H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Vartik Chokshi, AR
Section 40

801-804, 8 th Floor, Abhishree Ahmedabad-380015 Avenue, Opp. Hanumanji Temple, Nehrunagar, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad-380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AABCE9421H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by : DR ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent by : Shri Vartik Chokshi, AR 21/10/2021 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing 27/10/2021 घोषणा क" तार

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), , AHMEDABAD vs. EDELWEISS BROKING LTD.(ON BEHALF OF AMALGAMATING COMPANY EDELWEISS FINANCIAL ADVISORS LTD.), AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1939/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Wassem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2021/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Edelweiss Broking Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ (On Behalf Of Amalgamating Cricle-1(3), Vs. 1St Floor, B-109, Company, Edelweiss Financial Advisors Ltd.) Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Nr. 801-804, 8Th Floor, Abhishree Panjrapole, Ambawadi, Avenue, Opp. Hanumanji Ahmedabad-380015 Temple, Nehrunagar, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce9421H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Vartik Chokshi, AR
Section 40

801-804, 8 th Floor, Abhishree Ahmedabad-380015 Avenue, Opp. Hanumanji Temple, Nehrunagar, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad-380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AABCE9421H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by : DR ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent by : Shri Vartik Chokshi, AR 21/10/2021 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing 27/10/2021 घोषणा क" तार