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.

2 results for “disallowance”+ Section 80Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi123Mumbai95Jaipur75Bangalore38Hyderabad31Ahmedabad29Chennai25Kolkata22Chandigarh21Pune17Lucknow15Cochin13Indore13Raipur10Amritsar10Surat10Nagpur6Cuttack5Patna5Telangana5Agra4Jodhpur3Visakhapatnam3Karnataka2Ranchi2Varanasi2Allahabad2Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)2Section 80C2Section 1442Addition to Income2

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

disallowance of Rs. 1,68,000/- by treating the same as unexplained, it was submitted that section 69A had no application to the said amounts and they were recorded in the books of accounts. With regard to the refusal to grant the concession under section 80C

ANIL KUIMAR,ALLAHABAD vs. I T OFFICER, ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 171/ALLD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad24 Nov 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2011-12 Sri Anil Kumar V. Ito, Ward-1(1), Allahabad

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Godbale, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 80C

80C of the Income Tax Act as made by the assessing officer and confirmed by CIT(A) is highly unjustified. 6. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs. 10,699/- out of saving Bank interest as made by the assessing officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) is wrong and highly unjustified. 7. That in any view