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.

3,448 results for “disallowance”+ Section 9clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai16,920Delhi13,914Bangalore4,917Chennai4,823Kolkata4,244Ahmedabad3,448Pune3,258Hyderabad2,133Jaipur1,830Surat1,247Chandigarh1,238Indore1,094Cochin915Visakhapatnam778Raipur715Cuttack608Rajkot603Karnataka527Amritsar521Nagpur466Lucknow384Panaji251Agra228Jodhpur217Guwahati186Ranchi182Telangana151Allahabad127Patna126SC124Dehradun124Calcutta96Jabalpur83Kerala52Varanasi47Punjab & Haryana25Orissa12Rajasthan11Himachal Pradesh8A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN5Gauhati2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1Andhra Pradesh1Tripura1Uttarakhand1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Addition to Income84Section 14A83Section 143(3)70Disallowance68Section 6848Section 14735Section 14834Deduction32Section 54F28Section 115J

INOX INDIA LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2) NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 524/AHD/2023[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR
Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

disallowed the deduction under section 80HHC on the ground that on the same lease rental income, deduction under section 80IA has been allowed to the assessee and therefore in view of the section 80IA(9

Showing 1–20 of 3,448 · Page 1 of 173

...
22
Section 26321
Penalty17

INOX INDIA LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2) NOW CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 522/AHD/2023[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR
Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

disallowed the deduction under section 80HHC on the ground that on the same lease rental income, deduction under section 80IA has been allowed to the assessee and therefore in view of the section 80IA(9

INOX INDIA LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2) NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 523/AHD/2023[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR
Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

disallowed the deduction under section 80HHC on the ground that on the same lease rental income, deduction under section 80IA has been allowed to the assessee and therefore in view of the section 80IA(9

INOX INDIA LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1 NOW CIRCLE 1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 521/AHD/2023[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2000-01

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR
Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

disallowed the deduction under section 80HHC on the ground that on the same lease rental income, deduction under section 80IA has been allowed to the assessee and therefore in view of the section 80IA(9

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT GAS TRADING CO. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 468/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

GUJARAT GAS TRADIANG CO.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 364/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT GAS TRADING CO. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2394/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

GUJARAT GAS TRADIANG CO.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 363/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

GUJARAT GAS TRADIANG CO.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2371/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT GAS TRADING CO. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 467/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. INDO COLCHEM LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 840/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Kishan M. Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Kumar Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA vs. M/S. ASTRAL PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES,, BARODA

In the result, appeal, the appeal and cross-objection, both are dismissed

ITA 634/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: The Ao U/S 195(2) Of The Act, Though It Was Obligation Of The Assessee. 3. The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Erred In Law In Allowing The Claim Of The Assessee Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessee Itself Has Deducted Service Tax From The Payments Made To M/S. Urja International, Usa Which Proves That The

Section 143(3)Section 195(2)Section 40

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA vs. M/S. ASTRAL PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES,, BARODA

In the result, appeal, the appeal and cross-objection, both are dismissed

ITA 633/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: The Ao U/S 195(2) Of The Act, Though It Was Obligation Of The Assessee. 3. The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Erred In Law In Allowing The Claim Of The Assessee Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessee Itself Has Deducted Service Tax

Section 143(3)Section 195(2)Section 40

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BARODA vs. INOX INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,, VADODARA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1245/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Shri Purushottam Kumar
Section 195Section 5

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BARODA vs. INOX INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,, VADODARA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1246/AHD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Shri Purushottam Kumar
Section 195Section 5

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

M/S. INOX INDIA LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE PR. CIT-1,, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1391/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2017AY 2010-11
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 263Section 40Section 5

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. INDO COLCHEM PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1825/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 40

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

M/S. PANASONIC ENERGY INDIA CO.LTD,VADODARA vs. THE PR. CIT-2,, BARODA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1534/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Sept 2017AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 40Section 5Section 9

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

KARNAVATI ENGINEERING LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1400/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2018AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 40

9 was not applicable and, consequently, section 195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing

ATUL LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 38/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Atul Limited Acit, Cir.1(1)(1) Atul House, Gi Patel Mark Vs Ahmedabad. Mithila Society, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aabca 2390 M (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/05/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, AR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)Section 92C

disallowance of Rs.3,99,455/- under section 40(a)(i) for non- deduction of tax at source on payments made to foreign parties for product testing services, treating such payments as fees for technical services under section 9