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.

88 results for “disallowance”+ Section 145clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,783 Delhi1,452 Jaipur483 Kolkata472 Chennai398 Ahmedabad394 Bangalore389 Surat221 Hyderabad215 Chandigarh170 Pune167 Indore129 Agra123 Raipur111 Cochin105 Amritsar88 Rajkot85 Cuttack82 Visakhapatnam78 Lucknow69 Allahabad54 Nagpur45 Ranchi45 Calcutta39 Karnataka33 Jodhpur29 Telangana27 Patna19 Guwahati18 SC18 Dehradun14 Varanasi10 Panaji10 Jabalpur6 Punjab & Haryana4 Himachal Pradesh3 Rajasthan1 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Addition to Income66 Disallowance57 Section 145(3)44 Section 80I44 Deduction40 Section 143(3)39 Section 6839 Section 153A36 Section 14434 Section 139(1)

SHRI RAJ KUMAR ( M/S RADHIKA SALES CORP ), AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 3 (3), AMRITSAR

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

ITA 195/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250oSection 68

disallowance. ii. Paramount Impex v. AC IT, Circle-J, Ludhiana [2020] 117 taxmann.com 802 (Chandigarh Trib.) Section 145 of the Income

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. THE NAWANSHAHR CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD, NAWANSHAHR

ITA 61/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Jan 2018

Showing 1–20 of 88 · Page 1 of 5

23

Section 250(6)22

AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. T. S. Kapoor & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 61/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Pan: Aaaat4125G The Dy. C. I. T. Vs. The Nawanshahr Central Co-Op. Circle-Ii, Jalandhar. Bank Ltd. Nawanshahr, Distt. Doaba. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. S. S. Kanwal (D. R.)For Respondent: Sh. Rakesh Joshi (Adv.)

Section 36

disallowed the provisions which the assessee has made on standard assets and has also made addition on account of interest on Non Performing Assets which the assessee had not taken into account. We find that these issues are 3 ITA No. 61(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the orders

SMT. AVTAR KAUR,JALANDHAR vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 216/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar01 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 216/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. S. S. Kalra (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Das (D.R.)

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

section 145(3) is to be understood in the instant case. That is, it is equally valid for the Revenue to disallow

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR vs. SHRI BHUPINDER SINGH. M/S NOVELTY SWEETS, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 196/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

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

disallow such business loss with the surrendered income and the new section is applicable from assessment year 2022-23 onward and not for the year under consideration and accordingly, for assessment year 2019-20 under consideration, the business loss could be set off against the surrendered income. The AR finally contended that the provision of Section 145

M/S GOODWIL TRADERS,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SRINAGAR

In the result, these three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 30/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR &

section 145(3) of the Act and applying 1.50% of gross profit rate on gross receipts which is bad in law, arbitrary and unjustified. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. A.O has erred in law & on facts of the case by applying a higher rate and the sae is treated as Income

GOODWILL TRADERS.,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1), SRINAGAR

In the result, these three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 326/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR &

section 145(3) of the Act and applying 1.50% of gross profit rate on gross receipts which is bad in law, arbitrary and unjustified. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. A.O has erred in law & on facts of the case by applying a higher rate and the sae is treated as Income

GOODWILL TRADERS,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1), SRINAGAR

In the result, these three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 327/ASR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR &

section 145(3) of the Act and applying 1.50% of gross profit rate on gross receipts which is bad in law, arbitrary and unjustified. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. A.O has erred in law & on facts of the case by applying a higher rate and the sae is treated as Income

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR vs. M/S SURJIT SINGH AND CO, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected

ITA 16/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

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

145(3), the disallowances u/s 40A(3) becomes redundant. As regards the disallowance u/s 69C, the said section is not applicable

POONAM MARWAHA,AMRITSAR vs. ACIT DCIT CEN CIR, AMRITSAR

ITA 306/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Vikram Singh Yadav & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 44ASection 69

disallowances and cash payment in excess of Rs. 20,000 in a single day required detailed verification - Tribunal observed that during assessment proceedings, assessee submitted cash payment register and explained each item of proposed addition as per show cause notice of Assessing Officer and Assessing Officer, after going through cash payment register and explanation of each item, did not make

MESERS BRIGHT ENTERPRISES PVT.LTD,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, both the Appeals are partly allowed

ITA 169/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

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

Section 145Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

disallowance of expenses u/s 40A(2)(b) is unwarranted while accepting the books of accounts and method of accounting followed ITA Nos. 65/Asr/2017 3 & 169/Asr/2018 by the assessee and no defects have been found and neither there is invoking of proviso to section 145

BRIGHT ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD,JALANDHAR vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, both the Appeals are partly allowed

ITA 65/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

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

Section 145Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

disallowance of expenses u/s 40A(2)(b) is unwarranted while accepting the books of accounts and method of accounting followed ITA Nos. 65/Asr/2017 3 & 169/Asr/2018 by the assessee and no defects have been found and neither there is invoking of proviso to section 145

M/S KASHMIR STEEL ROLLING MILLS,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 548/ASR/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 548/(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Bansal (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

section 145 of the Act. The assessee did not furnish any explanation during the assessment proceedings. Interest income was accordingly assessed, and penalty proceedings initiated. Under the circumstances, the AO’s satisfaction for the levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) is plain and apparent. (b) The second item is qua the disallowance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), JAMMU vs. SH. NEERAJ AGGARWAL , JAMMU

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 349/ASR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar06 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 349/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Alok Kumar, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Sh. S. Krishnan (Adv.)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 80

145(3) of the Act and, consequently, the invocation of section 144 by him, is invalid; and (c) that the disallowance

SHRI FAROOQ AHMAD AHANGAR,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFICER, WARD-3(1, SRINAGAR

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 607/ASR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR

145(3) of the Act, the AO has estimated the income of te assessee as above. It is settled law that once books are rejected and income assessed by the AO on estimate basis, the provisions of section 68 of the Act cannot be invoked. 18. Without prejudice to above, the assessee has claimed wage expenses and the said liability

SHRI FAROOQ AHMAD AHANGAR,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(1), SRINAGAR

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 606/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR

145(3) of the Act, the AO has estimated the income of te assessee as above. It is settled law that once books are rejected and income assessed by the AO on estimate basis, the provisions of section 68 of the Act cannot be invoked. 18. Without prejudice to above, the assessee has claimed wage expenses and the said liability

SH. NITIN MAHAJAN,AMRITSAR. vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR.

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

ITA 148/ASR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

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

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

disallowance under various head of expenses without invoking the provisions of section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act and rejecting

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JAMMU vs. M/S. CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION CO,, JAMMU ( J&K)

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as well as the appeal filed the Revenue Department is dismissed and Cross Objection also stands disposed off

ITA 27/ASR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryita No.38(Asr)/2013 Assessment Year:2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. R.L. Gupta (Ld. Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Ld. DR)

Section 142(1)Section 250(6)Section 32(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 68

disallowances in certain cases notwithstanding that those amounts are allowed generally under other sections. The computation under Section 29 is to be made under section 145

M/S. CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION CO.,,JAMMU vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (HQRS), JAMMU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as well as the appeal filed the Revenue Department is dismissed and Cross Objection also stands disposed off

ITA 38/ASR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryita No.38(Asr)/2013 Assessment Year:2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. R.L. Gupta (Ld. Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Ld. DR)

Section 142(1)Section 250(6)Section 32(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 68

disallowances in certain cases notwithstanding that those amounts are allowed generally under other sections. The computation under Section 29 is to be made under section 145

RAJ KUMAR & CO,NAWANSHAHR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NAWANSHAHR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 641/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, Adv

Section 115Section 115BSection 144Section 250Section 68

section 145(3) of the Act 61, and gross profit has been estimated at fair percentage on sales, it is not open to the AO to rely upon the same rejected books of accounts, to make additions and or disallowance

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AMRITSAR. vs. SH. SHIV RAJ SINGH BAWA, AMRITSAR.

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed and the assessee’s CO, dismissed

ITA 407/ASR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 407/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)For Respondent: Sh. Tarun Bansal (Adv.)

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

section 40A(3) would be excluded in determining the actual cost of an asset. The argument, even as observed during hearing, is misconceived. Firstly, the same is applicable only AY 2018-19 onwards, i.e., where an expenditure is disallowed for those years, and has no application for the current year. Even otherwise, how could the cost of goods be revised