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”+ Demonetizationclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi221Chennai156Mumbai118Bangalore99Jaipur91Hyderabad80Kolkata69Ahmedabad50Surat40Visakhapatnam37Lucknow35Pune35Panaji32Chandigarh32Rajkot31Agra23Jodhpur18Cuttack18Indore13Patna12Amritsar10Dehradun10Raipur10Allahabad6Nagpur5Cochin4Jabalpur4Varanasi3Calcutta2Ranchi2Karnataka2Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 69A10Section 2506Addition to Income6Demonetization5Section 1444Section 143(3)4Cash Deposit4Section 142(1)3Disallowance3Section 143(2)

GAJENDRA KUMAR,MAHOBA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 (2)(4 ), BANDA

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

ITA 94/ALLD/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad28 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Sh. Subhash Malguria & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2017-18 Gajendra Kumar, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 526, Rathaur Colony, Jaitpur, Ward-2(2)(4), Banda Belatal, Mahoba, U.P. Pan:Bitpk6827P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.08.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: [ This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 3.01.2025, Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ito, Ward-2(2)(4), Banda Dated 21.12.2019 Passed Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Learned Cit (Appeal) Has Erred In Law & Facts In Disallowing Appeal & Confirming The Addition Made By A.O. Of Rs. 25, 90,414/- As Cash Deposits Into Bank Account Under Section 69A Of It Act, 1961 Because All Notices Were Issued U/S 250 Of The Act On Itba Portal & No Physical Notice Was Issued To Appellant On Address Mentioned In Filed Itr & Filed Appeal & Has Disallowed Appeal Without Considering This Fact That Appellant Lives At Village Jaitpur Post Belataal, District Mahoba (U.P.) & Is Unknown About Information Technology. 2. That The Learned Cit (Appeal) Has Erred In Law & Facts In Disallowing Appeal & Confirming The Addition Made By A.O. Of Rs. 25, 90,414/- As Cash Deposits Into Bank Account Under Section 69A Of It Act, 1961 Without Considering This Fact That Appeal Was Filed By Advocate Dinesh Gupta Who Was Expired & Email Id In Profile Of Appellant Was Update By Him. Appellant Was Unknown About Login Id & Password Of Portal & Email Id Which Was Maintained By Late Advocate Dinesh Gupta.

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.A Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
2
Section 115B2
Unexplained Money2
For Respondent:
Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 221(1)Section 250Section 69A

disallowing and making addition of Rs. 25, 90,414/- without considering this fact that case of appellant was selected only make enquiry about cash deposit of Rs. 11,20,000/- into bank accounts during demonetization

RAJENDRA TRIPATHI,MAHARAJGANJ vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(4), MAHARAJGANJ

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 100/ALLD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad27 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2017-18 Rajendra Tripathi, Vs. Income Tax Officer-1(4), Pharenda Road, Maharajganj Gorakhpur-273155, U.P. Pan:Aadfi7669A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Ashish Bansal, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.12.2024 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac On 30.05.2024. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Because The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Restricting The Relief To Rs.8,16,905/- (Being 30% Of The Overall Disallowance) Only As Against The Overall Disallowance Aggregating To Rs.27,23,015/- Made By The Ld. Assessing Officer Under Various Heads Of Expenses Being "Advertisement & Publicity, Staff Welfare, Sales Promotion Expenses, Salary To Staff", While Passing The Assessment Order Dated 19.12.2019, As The Said Addition Itself Is Based On A Very Fallacious Ground That; "It Is Customary In Assessment Orders To Disallow Percentage Of Certain Expenses For Different Reasons. However In This Case I Rely On The Daily Observation Of The Staff Of The Income Tax Office, Maharajganj Who Are Sure That The Assessee Works Through Daily Wagers For Loading & Unloading Of Goods & Does Not Employ Any Staff. Besides The Above The Other Three Expenses Have Never Been Observed To Have Been Incurred."

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 250Section 69A

disallowance of expenditure of Rs.19,06,110/- (70% of the overall expenditure claimed) sustained by the Id. CIT(A) is much too high and excessive. 5. BECAUSE the deposit of cash Rs.32,16,500/- in SBN in the bank account by the appellant on 11.11.2016 (i.e. after demonetization

CAREER COACHING (ALLD) PRIVATE LIMITED ,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT ACIT, RANGE - 2, ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 62/ALLD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad25 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Subhash Malguria & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

Section 143(3)

demonetization period as the company had closing cash in hand as on 08/11/2019 at Rs.1,12,22,500/-. The assessee has shown business receipt of Rs.19,07,14,816/-. The Assessing Officer noted that assessee has paid Rs.35,42,925/- under other expenses for interest on service tax, income tax and TDS and has also paid Rs.4

POOJA GROVER,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CIR-2,, ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 140/ALLD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad20 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Subhash Malguria & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 251Section 69A

disallowance of depreciation to the extent of Rs.5,29,827/- on the ground that supporting bills and vouchers to the extent of Rs.21,55,472/- are in the name of Umang Graver and Umang Sarees whereas the name of proprietary concern of appellant is M/s Umang. I.T.A. No.140/Alld/2024 3 7. BECAUSE the NFAC has failed to appreciate the facts that

SANKAR LAL JAISWAL,,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO- 1(5), ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 80/ALLD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad28 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SH. SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250

demonetization period. After giving benefit of Rs. 2,50,000/- as personal savings, the balance cash deposit of Rs. 1,68,000/- was treated as unexplained investment made by the assessee under section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and was brought to tax under the provisions of section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act. 5. Aggrieved with

SANJAY KUMAR KESARWANI,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO -1(5), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee with tribunal in ITA No

ITA 10/ALLD/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad16 Mar 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Kumar Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)

demonetization period and to verify that said cash deposit were from disclosed sources, by invoking provisions of Section 143(2) of the 1961 Act , which culminated into assessment order dated 11.12.2018 passed by AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act , wherein additions to the income of the assessee to the tune of Rs. 14,29,221/- were made