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 12Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai610Delhi545Bangalore270Kolkata221Ahmedabad198Chennai150Jaipur132Pune114Hyderabad89Chandigarh85Lucknow83Indore65Visakhapatnam50Cochin46Calcutta34Surat34Amritsar33Cuttack32Raipur29Rajkot21Jodhpur20Nagpur20Karnataka19Agra15Ranchi11Patna8Allahabad6Dehradun5Panaji5Varanasi5SC5Telangana4Jabalpur4Guwahati4Andhra Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1

Key Topics

Section 1117Section 15410Section 2(15)9Exemption6Section 12A5Section 143(3)5Addition to Income5Section 123Section 260A3Charitable Trust

ALLAHABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 88/ALLD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

12A of the 1961 Act. It is a State Government body constituted by an Act of State Government and is engaged in the business of development and sale of land for residential and commercial purposes. The object of the authority as defined under section 7 of “The Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning & Development Act, 1973” (hereinafter known as the UPUPDA

2

ALLAHABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 87/ALLD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

12A of the 1961 Act. It is a State Government body constituted by an Act of State Government and is engaged in the business of development and sale of land for residential and commercial purposes. The object of the authority as defined under section 7 of “The Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning & Development Act, 1973” (hereinafter known as the UPUPDA

ALLAHABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 89/ALLD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

12A of the 1961 Act. It is a State Government body constituted by an Act of State Government and is engaged in the business of development and sale of land for residential and commercial purposes. The object of the authority as defined under section 7 of “The Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning & Development Act, 1973” (hereinafter known as the UPUPDA

UMRAO SINGH SMARAK SAMITI,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, CPC, BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 38/ALLD/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Allahabad23 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rabin Chaudhari, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154

disallowing benefit of Section 11 to 13 under Section 154 of the Act since it is not apparent mistake from record and needs detail scrutiny which was not done hence the order under Section 154 as passed by CPC Bengaluru is highly unjustified. (iii) That in view of the matter the learned CIT (Appeal) was wrong in framing the order

ITO (EXEMPTION), VARANASI vs. M/S. SMT. BANARASI DEVI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, VARANASI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 204/ALLD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad10 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Virendra Ojha, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri D. K. Singh, C.A
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 154

disallowed by the A.O. How can be it is justifiable? These are additions on the basis of conjecture and not supported by legal facts.” 5. The ld. CIT(A), on considering the submissions of the assessee, held that since the CIT (Exemption) has granted registration under section 154/12AA of the Act to the assessee, vide his order dated 15/12/2016

ITO (EXEMPTION), VARANASI vs. M/S. SMT. BANARASI DEVI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, VARANASI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 205/ALLD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad10 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Virendra Ojha, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri D. K. Singh, C.A
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 154

disallowed by the A.O. How can be it is justifiable? These are additions on the basis of conjecture and not supported by legal facts.” 5. The ld. CIT(A), on considering the submissions of the assessee, held that since the CIT (Exemption) has granted registration under section 154/12AA of the Act to the assessee, vide his order dated 15/12/2016