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.

14 results for “disallowance”+ Section 194C(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai556Kolkata418Delhi404Chennai205Bangalore193Ahmedabad60Hyderabad45Indore36Jaipur35Raipur33Rajkot31Pune16Karnataka15Nagpur15Amritsar14Visakhapatnam13Cochin13Cuttack13Surat13Panaji12Chandigarh11Ranchi10Lucknow10Guwahati9Allahabad9Kerala7Patna7Calcutta5Dehradun5Jodhpur3SC3Agra3Varanasi1Jabalpur1Telangana1Uttarakhand1Rajasthan1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 4030Section 143(3)14Disallowance14Addition to Income14TDS12Deduction11Section 250(6)9Section 369Depreciation9Section 14A(3)

MEASAGE TAU AGRO SALES PRIVATE LIMITED,FARIDKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(2), FEROZEPUR

In the result the ground no

ITA 324/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(3)

disallowed under section 40A(3). The ld. Counsel argued & placed the fact that assessee having factory in remote area in village Bholuwal, where no banking facility is available. In additional evidence the assessee has filed Certificate of Panchayat with English version & Affidavit of director of company which are enclosed as Page 31-33 of Paper book. By the additional evidence

MEASAGE.TAU AGRO SALES PRIVATE LIMITED,FARIDKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(4), FARIDKOT

7
Section 194C6
Section 1544

In the result the ground no

ITA 325/ASR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(3)

disallowed under section 40A(3). The ld. Counsel argued & placed the fact that assessee having factory in remote area in village Bholuwal, where no banking facility is available. In additional evidence the assessee has filed Certificate of Panchayat with English version & Affidavit of director of company which are enclosed as Page 31-33 of Paper book. By the additional evidence

ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1, JAMMU vs. MESERS JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LIMITED , SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

ITA 320/ASR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

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

Section 143(3)Section 14A(3)Section 250(6)Section 36Section 40

3. The Ld. C1T(A), Jammu has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 74,31,428/- on account of depreciation of Wooden Partition by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court in case of CIT Vs. Madras Auto service Pvt. Ltd. 233 ITR 468 (SC) which is different from the present case as in that case

THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LIMITED,SRINAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMMU

In the result, the ground No

ITA 330/ASR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

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

Section 143(3)Section 14A(3)Section 250(6)Section 36Section 40

3. The Ld. C1T(A), Jammu has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 74,31,428/- on account of depreciation of Wooden Partition by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court in case of CIT Vs. Madras Auto service Pvt. Ltd. 233 ITR 468 (SC) which is different from the present case as in that case

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

In the result, the ground No

ITA 296/ASR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2022AY 2005-06

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

Section 143(3)Section 14A(3)Section 250(6)Section 36Section 40

3. The Ld. C1T(A), Jammu has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 74,31,428/- on account of depreciation of Wooden Partition by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court in case of CIT Vs. Madras Auto service Pvt. Ltd. 233 ITR 468 (SC) which is different from the present case as in that case

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

In the result, the ground No

ITA 297/ASR/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2022AY 2006-07

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

Section 143(3)Section 14A(3)Section 250(6)Section 36Section 40

3. The Ld. C1T(A), Jammu has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 74,31,428/- on account of depreciation of Wooden Partition by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court in case of CIT Vs. Madras Auto service Pvt. Ltd. 233 ITR 468 (SC) which is different from the present case as in that case

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX , CIRCLE -1,, JAMMU vs. THE JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LTD.,, SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

ITA 637/ASR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

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

Section 143(3)Section 14A(3)Section 250(6)Section 36Section 40

3. The Ld. C1T(A), Jammu has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 74,31,428/- on account of depreciation of Wooden Partition by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court in case of CIT Vs. Madras Auto service Pvt. Ltd. 233 ITR 468 (SC) which is different from the present case as in that case

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMMU, SRINAGAR vs. MESERS JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LIMITED , SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

ITA 790/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

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

Section 143(3)Section 14A(3)Section 250(6)Section 36Section 40

3. The Ld. C1T(A), Jammu has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 74,31,428/- on account of depreciation of Wooden Partition by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court in case of CIT Vs. Madras Auto service Pvt. Ltd. 233 ITR 468 (SC) which is different from the present case as in that case

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMMU vs. MESERS JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LIMITED , SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

ITA 319/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

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

Section 143(3)Section 14A(3)Section 250(6)Section 36Section 40

3. The Ld. C1T(A), Jammu has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 74,31,428/- on account of depreciation of Wooden Partition by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court in case of CIT Vs. Madras Auto service Pvt. Ltd. 233 ITR 468 (SC) which is different from the present case as in that case

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-IV,, PATHANKOT vs. THE GURDASPUR CENTRAL CO. OPBANK LTD, GURDASPUR

In the result, the ground no

ITA 542/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meenaandsh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 40Section 43D

section 194C. The disallowance of Rs 34,90,828/- u/s 40a(ia) is therefore deleted.” The ld. Counsel further in argument invited our attention inCBDTCircular 6.1 No. 13/2006 dated 13.12.2006. The relevant para is extracted as below:- “3

FIRST INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS LTD.,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 46/ASR/2023[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar20 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.46/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154oSection 194CSection 250Section 40

section 194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that reimbursement of freight, loading/unloading charges to the associate concern is not any payment for the services rendered by the associate concerns and therefore, has erre’d in law and on the facts and circumstances of case in confirming disallowance

M/S KASHMIR CEMENT,UDHAMPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4), UDHAMPUR

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

ITA 584/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 194CSection 40

3. After considering the contentions raised by the counsel for the assessee in grounds of appeal and facts discussed by the ld. CIT(A) that since the freight paid to M/s Punjab Kashmir Roadlines a sum aggregating to Rs.1,49,470/- which exceeds Rs.75,000/-. Thus, it was hit by section 194C of the Act, and therefore, the assessee

SH. AMRINDER SINGH DHIMAN,NAKODAR vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE PHAGWARA, PHAGWARA

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

ITA 584/ASR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Trilochan Singh PS Khalsa, Sr DR
Section 40

3 Amrinder Singh Dhiman v. Addl. CIT 4. Ground No. 1 is general in nature. 5. Ground no. 2 to 4, the petitioner was assessed for the assessment year 2010- 11 during the proceedings the assessee’s foreign travel was duly disallowed by the ld Assessing Officer (in brevity the AO) at the rate of 20% on total amount

MESAGE. NORTHERN TRASFORMERS. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA 329/Asr/2019 is partly

ITA 329/ASR/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

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

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 250(6)Section 40

194C for payment to transporter amount of Rs.22,850/- and Rs.26,723/- which is worked out total amount of Rs.49,573/- was added back with total income of the assessee.Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition made by AO. 3. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before us. 4. During