Search: disallowance | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

86 results for “disallowance”+ Section 24clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai8,893 Delhi7,764 Bangalore2,834 Chennai2,485 Kolkata2,469 Ahmedabad1,881 Pune1,461 Hyderabad1,249 Jaipur1,233 Indore723 Chandigarh705 Surat590 Raipur410 Visakhapatnam410 Cochin351 Cuttack324 Amritsar315 Rajkot307 Nagpur245 Lucknow226 Karnataka211 Guwahati148 Jodhpur147 Agra128 Ranchi105 Allahabad86 Telangana85 Panaji84 SC76 Patna69 Calcutta60 Dehradun49 Jabalpur39 Varanasi32 Kerala27 Rajasthan8 Punjab & Haryana8 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN4 Himachal Pradesh3 Orissa3 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 Gauhati1 Tripura1 Uttarakhand1 Bombay1 ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 153A99 Addition to Income35 Section 143(3)34 Section 14834 Section 14727 Section 153D25 Section 143(2)23 Disallowance22 Section 25021

M/S UDVASIT BEROJGAR SAHAKARI SHRAM SAMVIDA SAMITI LTD.,,SONBHADRA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 27/ALLD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad02 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2Section 36(1)Section 43B

disallowed by invoking provisions of section 36(1) (va), read with section 2 (24) (x). 4. That 1TAT Lucknow Bench

Showing 1–20 of 86 · Page 1 of 5

Section 143(1)17

Search & Seizure17

Charitable Trust16

SHRI NEERAJ MAHESHWARI,SONEBHADRA vs. DY. CIT, (CPC), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 18/ALLD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad10 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Before Shri. Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Neeraj Maheshwari, V. Shri Amrit Raj Singh, Bijpur Rihand Nagar, Sonebhadra- Dy. Commissioner Of Inco Tax, 2312233, U.P. Cpc Bangalore Pan- Afvpm5660E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. A.K. Pandey, Adv Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.05.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Sh. A.K. Pandey, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 234BSection 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

disallowance of Rs. 6,31,788/- made under Section 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) by A.O being

COMMERCIAL AUTO SALES PVT. LTD.,,ALLAHABAD vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is in ITA No

ITA 15/ALLD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad20 Jan 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh.S K Jaiswal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance of aforesaid expenditure of Rs. 11,20,461/- , vide processing return of income u/s 143(1) of the 1961 Act , by invoking provision of Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24

RAJESH KUMAR JAISWAL,,ALLAHABAD vs. DEPUTY/ACIT(CENTRAL), ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 16/ALLD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad02 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: the query raised by the assessing authority vide questionnaire issued under section 142 (1) dated 23.01.2021, in assessment proceedings for the AY 2018-19.

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Agarwal & Ms. VidishaFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 115Section 115BSection 142Section 24Section 250Section 68Section 69

disallowed the deduction under section 24(a) amounting to Rs. 7,03,585/- on these properties. He also disallowed the house

VINOD KUMAR TANDON,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(CPC),, BEGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 29/ALLD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad22 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234BSection 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowances. In terms of this scheme, section 40 (which too starts with a non-obstante clause overriding Sections 30-38), deals with what cannot be deducted in computing income under the head "Profits and Gains of Business and Profession". Likewise, section 40A(2) opens with a non-obstante clause and spells out what expenses and payments are not deductible

DCIT, CIRCLE-II , ALLAHABAD vs. BHARAT PUMPS & COMPRESSORS LTD, ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue for ay: 2007-08 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 147/ALLD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad12 Aug 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shantanu Dhamija, CIT (DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(va)

disallowed the entire amount of Rs. 2,32,95,170/- by invoking provisions of Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24

DCIT, CIRCLE-II , ALLAHABAD vs. BHARAT PUMPS & COMPRESSORS LTD, ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue for ay: 2007-08 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 148/ALLD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad12 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shantanu Dhamija, CIT (DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(va)

disallowed the entire amount of Rs. 2,32,95,170/- by invoking provisions of Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24

ACIT CIRCLE-2, ALLAHABAD vs. M/S SHERWANI SUGAR SYNDICATE LTD., ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 227/ALLD/2016[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad24 Dec 2021AY 1997-98

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 1997-98 The Assistant Commissioner Of V. M/S Shervani Sugar Syndicate Income-Tax, Circle-2, Ltd., Allahabad, U.P. 28, South Road , Allahabad,U.P. Pan/Gir: 19-653-Cv-3480 New Pan: Not Available (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Bansal Adv

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44A

disallowed the said interest accrued and due to the tune of Rs. 94,93,016/- as there was no proof of payment of said interest which was accrued and due , by invoking provisions of Section 43B. The main contention of the assessee before ld.CIT(A) was that it was sanctioned term loan of Rs. 3 crores from U.P. State Government

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING (P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT (OSD), ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 154/ALLD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 40

24,452.00 for the year under consideration as against the returned income of Rs. 19,40,350.00 is highly unjustified and against the provision of the income tax act hence such order is a nullity, void and liable to be declared illegal. 3. That in any view of the matter

KESARWANI MARKETING(P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 373/ALLD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 40

24,452.00 for the year under consideration as against the returned income of Rs. 19,40,350.00 is highly unjustified and against the provision of the income tax act hence such order is a nullity, void and liable to be declared illegal. 3. That in any view of the matter

ZILA SAHKARI BANK LTD.,MIRZAPUR vs. ASSTT. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, MIRZAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 135/ALLD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh.Ashish Bansal AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowance as was made by the AO, the ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee is not eligible for deduction under the second limb of Section 36(1)(viia)(a) of the 1961 Act which concerns itself with deduction computed @10% of aggregate average advances made by Rural Branches of assessee, keeping in view amended provisions of Section

ZILA SAHKARI BANK LTD,,MIRZAPUR vs. JT. C.I.T.,, MIRZAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 136/ALLD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh.Ashish Bansal AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowance as was made by the AO, the ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee is not eligible for deduction under the second limb of Section 36(1)(viia)(a) of the 1961 Act which concerns itself with deduction computed @10% of aggregate average advances made by Rural Branches of assessee, keeping in view amended provisions of Section

M/S MILLENIUM CONSULTANTS& SERVICE PROVIDERS,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 138/ALLD/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

disallowance in the present Assessment Year. 22. In order to remedy this position and to remove hardships which were being caused to the assessees belonging to such second category, amendments have been made in the provisions of Section 40(a) (ia) by the Finance Act, 2010. 23. Section 40(a)(ia), as amended by Finance Act, 2010, with effect from

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING(P).LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT. CIT(OSD),, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 78/ALLD/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR

Section 132Section 153A

Section 292C and the assessee having failed to rebut the presumption by cogent evidence. The ld. CIT(A) also rejected the theory of peak negative cash balance, as the assessee failed to explain that the same was circulating. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) sustained the additions. Still aggrieved , the assessee filed second appeal with tribunal. The ld. Counsel

M/S KESARWANI <ARKETING (P) LTD,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT (OSD),, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 159/ALLD/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR

Section 132Section 153A

Section 292C and the assessee having failed to rebut the presumption by cogent evidence. The ld. CIT(A) also rejected the theory of peak negative cash balance, as the assessee failed to explain that the same was circulating. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) sustained the additions. Still aggrieved , the assessee filed second appeal with tribunal. The ld. Counsel

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING (P) LTD,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,(OSD), ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 77/ALLD/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR

Section 132Section 153A

Section 292C and the assessee having failed to rebut the presumption by cogent evidence. The ld. CIT(A) also rejected the theory of peak negative cash balance, as the assessee failed to explain that the same was circulating. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) sustained the additions. Still aggrieved , the assessee filed second appeal with tribunal. The ld. Counsel

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING (P) LTD,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT. C.IT,(OSD), ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 76/ALLD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR

Section 132Section 153A

Section 292C and the assessee having failed to rebut the presumption by cogent evidence. The ld. CIT(A) also rejected the theory of peak negative cash balance, as the assessee failed to explain that the same was circulating. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) sustained the additions. Still aggrieved , the assessee filed second appeal with tribunal. The ld. Counsel

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3) , ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 19/ALLD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253(3)

disallowance of Rebate to the tune of Rs. 17,12,24,716/- . The assessee had claimed Rebate Expenses as deduction while computing income chargeable to tax under the head “ Profits and Gains from Business or Profession”. The assessee was asked to explain the same by AO in the proceedings conducted by AO u/s 143(3) read with Section

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 20/ALLD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253(3)

disallowance of Rebate to the tune of Rs. 17,12,24,716/- . The assessee had claimed Rebate Expenses as deduction while computing income chargeable to tax under the head “ Profits and Gains from Business or Profession”. The assessee was asked to explain the same by AO in the proceedings conducted by AO u/s 143(3) read with Section

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 21/ALLD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253(3)

disallowance of Rebate to the tune of Rs. 17,12,24,716/- . The assessee had claimed Rebate Expenses as deduction while computing income chargeable to tax under the head “ Profits and Gains from Business or Profession”. The assessee was asked to explain the same by AO in the proceedings conducted by AO u/s 143(3) read with Section