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.

13 results for “disallowance”+ Section 127clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,167Mumbai1,009Bangalore304Ahmedabad227Jaipur219Kolkata186Chennai184Pune161Chandigarh126Hyderabad107Indore102Surat90Karnataka83Cochin83Raipur65Nagpur53Visakhapatnam40Lucknow38Calcutta38Cuttack38Rajkot31Ranchi23Jodhpur17Guwahati17Agra14Amritsar13Patna11Dehradun9Allahabad9Panaji9Varanasi7SC6Telangana3Jabalpur3Rajasthan2Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 6819Section 56(1)(vii)15Addition to Income12Section 153C9Section 153A9Disallowance8Section 407Section 143(3)5Section 153D4Section 36(2)(i)

THE DY. COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S. THE JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LTD,, SRINAGAR

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 298/ASR/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. T. S. Kapoor & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 298/(Asr)/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Pan: Aaact6167G Dy. C. I. T., Vs. M/S. The Jammu & Kashmir Circle-1, 2Nd Floor Aayakar Bank Ltd., Corporate Head Bhawan, Railhead Complex, Quarters, M. A. Road, Jammu. Srinagar. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. S. S. Kanwal (D. R.)For Respondent: Written Submissions
Section 14ASection 40Section 40a

section 14A of the Act was not applicable and it could not have been invoked; that had the assessee claimed this income exempt, it was exactly the same as in the earlier years, in which years, it was held that in view of the assessee's own funds, no disallowance of interest cost could have been made and that

4
Cash Deposit3
Deduction2

M/S KAPURTHALA ESTATE (P) LTD,JALANDHAR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

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

ITA 109/ASR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryita No.109(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year:2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. A. N. Mishra (Ld. DR)
Section 127Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

127 by the competent authority. Assessment framed u/s 143(3) is illegal & bad in law and is without jurisdiction. 2. That on the facts & circumstances of the case, Learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming addition of Rs.1,00,000/- being development expenses. Addition confirmed is illegal and bad in law. 3. That on the facts & circumstances

SHRI MADAL LAL,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 112/ASR/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 153B(1)Section 153D

127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, notice u/s 153A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961.” 11. The ld. AR had submitted that the fact ofpassing theassessment order on 27.07.2016, i.e prior to receipt of the approval letter is confirmed from the receipt stamp dated 28/7/2016, marked on the approval letter dated 27.07.2016 , after it was received in the office

SHRIMATI JATINDER KAUR ( ALIAS AMRITA),JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 730/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 153ASection 56(1)(vii)Section 68

127 DTR 241 and also in the case of CIT vs. SunitaDhadda reported at 101 CCH 277. Copy of the decisions is enclosed at page no. 51A to 51N. The addition made is thus bad in law on this score also and deserves to be deleted. Necessary relief may please be allowed. 2. The third ground of appeal is that

SHRIMATI JATINDER KAUR(ALIAS AMRITA),JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 728/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 153ASection 56(1)(vii)Section 68

127 DTR 241 and also in the case of CIT vs. SunitaDhadda reported at 101 CCH 277. Copy of the decisions is enclosed at page no. 51A to 51N. The addition made is thus bad in law on this score also and deserves to be deleted. Necessary relief may please be allowed. 2. The third ground of appeal is that

SHRIMATI JATINDER KAUR (ALIAS AMRITA),JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 731/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jul 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 153ASection 56(1)(vii)Section 68

127 DTR 241 and also in the case of CIT vs. SunitaDhadda reported at 101 CCH 277. Copy of the decisions is enclosed at page no. 51A to 51N. The addition made is thus bad in law on this score also and deserves to be deleted. Necessary relief may please be allowed. 2. The third ground of appeal is that

MESERS AMARNARTH AGGARWAL BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 192/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal &For Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 36(2)Section 36(2)(i)

section 36(2)(i) no deduction of bad 4 Amarnath Aggarwal B. P Ltd v. Dy.CIT doubtful debts. The assessee’s contention is that the assessee wanted to purchase the land in anticipation for financial gain in Panchkula and paid the amount accordingly. The assessee denied that he never claimed this amount

PANKAJ AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED ,G.T ROAD, MOGA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, FEROZEPUR

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

ITA 238/ASR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, C. A
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

disallowed the business expenses i.e. Bad Debts, loss claimed on account of Fire and Trade Discount while calculating the business loss without any legal basis which should be allowed as per law. 6. (iv) That, the Assessing Officer has failed to appreciate the copy of account of both the persons from whom credit transactions

MESERS GANESH RICE MILLS,MUKTSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

In the result the appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 287/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, A. RFor Respondent: Sh. Rohit Mehra, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250(6)

disallowance cannot be sustained without any further enquiry and confrontation to the appellant. Even though no separate addition has been made, therefore from the computation of income viewpoint this ground of appeal is infructuous and for statistical purposes stated to be dismissed.” 3.3. In argument the ld. Counsel, Mr. Sehgal mentioned that in the same paragraph

SHRI TARSAIM SINGH JAMWAL,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 162/ASR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT- DR
Section 153C

disallowances and also ignored the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (2016) 380-ITR-573 (Del). 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.2,50,000/- on merit as complete source of cash deposit have

SHRI TARSAIM SINGH JAMWAL,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 163/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT- DR
Section 153C

disallowances and also ignored the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (2016) 380-ITR-573 (Del). 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.2,50,000/- on merit as complete source of cash deposit have

SHRI TARSAIM SINGH JAMWAL,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY COMMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE , JAMMU

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 161/ASR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT- DR
Section 153C

disallowances and also ignored the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (2016) 380-ITR-573 (Del). 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.2,50,000/- on merit as complete source of cash deposit have

M/S HOLY FAITH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD,JALANDHAR vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 181/ASR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. Ravish Soodita No.181/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 M/S Holy Faith International Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Mbd House, Central Circle-Ii, Railway Road, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach6111J Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Bhawani Shankar, Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.01.2019 Order Per N. K. Saini: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20.03.2017 Of Ld. Cit(A)-I, Jalandhar. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised In This Appeal: “1. That The Worthy Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-1, Jalandhar Has Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Filed By The Assessee. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Contention Of The Assessing Officer In Reopening The Case U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act And, Thus, Framing Of Assessment U/S 147 R.W.S.143(3)/153C At An Income Of Rs. 4,95,13,441/- Against The Returned Income Of Rs. 4,63,33,441/-. 3. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Considering That There Was No Reason To Believe That The Income Of The

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Bhawani Shankar, DR
Section 131Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153C

127 DTR 141 in the case of Kishinchand Chellaram as reported in 125 ITR 713. 8. That the addition as made by the Assessing Officer has been withheld/confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) against the facts and circumstances of the case and submission filed during the course of assessment proceedings before the ITA No. 181/Asr./2017 3 Holy Faith International