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.

4 results for “disallowance”+ Section 254clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,725 Delhi1,458 Surat510 Bangalore481 Chennai421 Kolkata330 Ahmedabad280 Pune239 Jaipur214 Cochin158 Hyderabad158 Chandigarh138 Indore86 Raipur83 Rajkot47 Amritsar44 Calcutta41 Visakhapatnam40 Lucknow40 Karnataka38 Guwahati31 Nagpur20 Panaji19 Cuttack17 SC16 Jodhpur13 Varanasi12 Jabalpur11 Agra10 Telangana10 Ranchi6 Dehradun5 Allahabad4 Punjab & Haryana3 Kerala3 Patna2 Rajasthan2 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1 Orissa1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 1488 Section 407 Section 143(2)5 Section 194C4 Addition to Income4 Section 143(3)3 Section 2502 Disallowance2

MAHAVIR PRASAD SATISH CHANDRA,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3) , ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 69/ALLD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad15 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Chanda, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

254 Taxman 163. Thus, the ld. AR has submitted that the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer by invoking the provisions of Section

M/S DEORA ELECTRIC WORKS,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 637/ALLD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad20 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Deora Electric Works V. The Jcit 58-A, Sardar Patel Marg Range – I Allahabad Allahabad Pan:Aadfd7479B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Praveen Godbole, C.A. Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 17 01 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 20 03 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250

disallowable under section 40A(3) of the Act, it was submitted that these were made after office hours at various sites. Regarding the difference in amount of bank guarantee and commission as reported by the Bank, the assessee submitted that the guarantees were taken from Bank of Baroda, Main Branch, Allahabad and the fees were collected by them from

SURENDRA KUMAR MISHRA,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CIR-2, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 140/ALLD/2023[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad10 Feb 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2002-03 Surendra Kumar Mishra, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of 794A/1, Sohabatiyabagh, Income Tax, Circle-2, Allahabad Allahabad-211006, U.P. Pan:Aibpm4858R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Ashish Bansal, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Under Section 250 R.W.S. 254 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 26.10.2023. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Because The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Dismissing The 'Additional Ground' Relating To Non-Issuance Of Notice Under Section 143(2) Of The Act, Raised Before The Appellate Authority During The Course Of First Round Of Litigation, Which Has Been Remanded Back By The Hon'Ble Itat In Terms Of Order Dated 09.11.2012, By Observing That The Return Filed By The Appellant In Terms Of Letter Dated 10.11.2008 As Not A Valid Return In Compliance To Notice Dated 11.02.2008 Issued Under Section 148 Of The Act, As The Said Letter Was Filed By The Appellant After The Time Limit Of 30 Days Provided To Do So In Terms Of Notice Dated 11.02.208 Issued Under Section 148 Of The Act. 2. Because The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Observing That The Appellant Could Not Have Demand For Issuance Of Notice Under Section 143(2) Of The 1 Surendra Kumar Mishra

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 69C

254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 26.10.2023. The grounds of appeal preferred by the assessee are as under:- “1. BECAUSE the CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in dismissing the 'additional ground' relating to non-issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act, raised before the appellate authority during the course

RAJENDRA KUMAR KESARI,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 67/ALLD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad18 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2012-13 Rajendra Kumar Kesari, V. Income Tax Officer, Bharatganj, Allahabad Ward-1(4), Allahabad Pan-Ahlpk4554D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Mr. Praveen Godbole, Ca Respondent By: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.12.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.12.2020

For Appellant: Mr. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

section is higly unjustified. 5- That in any view of the matter the appellant reserves his right to take fresh grounds of appeal before hearing of appeal. 2. The only issue arises in the appeal of the assessee is regarding the adhoc disallowances @20% made by the AO in respect of some expenses for want of proper bills and vouchers