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.

8 results for “disallowance”+ Section 199clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai913Delhi872Bangalore274Kolkata234Ahmedabad220Chennai217Jaipur148Hyderabad114Pune95Chandigarh78Rajkot59Raipur57Lucknow49Indore49Cuttack47Calcutta38Jodhpur29Visakhapatnam27Allahabad24Nagpur23Surat22Karnataka21Cochin19Guwahati12Amritsar8Agra7Telangana7Ranchi4SC4Rajasthan4Punjab & Haryana3Varanasi1Jabalpur1Orissa1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 145(3)13Section 2639Addition to Income7Section 143(3)4Natural Justice4Deduction3Disallowance3Section 1442Section 54D2TDS

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

section 139(2) of the Act. The Tribunal cannot enter into a reappraisal of evidence after taking into consideration the additional evidence produced by the assessee before it in a proceeding arising out of a best judgment assessment.’ In other words, there is no scope for admission of additional evidence in the facts and circumstances of the case, making

2

SHRI AMRITPAL SINGH (PROP),JALANDHAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 1, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 425/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

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

Section 110Section 263Section 54D

disallowed as per I.T.A. No. 425/Asr/2019 14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 terms of order passed under section 143(3) dated 20nd December, 2016 (Refer page No.32-36 of APB).The asseseealso relies upon the pronouncements per contents of the judgement set separately filed along with present written submission which can be perused in this regard i.e.a)Commissioner of Income

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)

disallowing the other expenses. 4. That the appellant craves the leave to alter and to substitute any grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 3. Briefly, facts of the case are that the appellant is a trading concern dealing in wholesale trade of Kiryana items including edible oils etc. The Assessing Officer has applied GP rate

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)

disallowing the other expenses. 4. That the appellant craves the leave to alter and to substitute any grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 3. Briefly, facts of the case are that the appellant is a trading concern dealing in wholesale trade of Kiryana items including edible oils etc. The Assessing Officer has applied GP rate

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)

disallowing the other expenses. 4. That the appellant craves the leave to alter and to substitute any grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 3. Briefly, facts of the case are that the appellant is a trading concern dealing in wholesale trade of Kiryana items including edible oils etc. The Assessing Officer has applied GP rate

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-3, FEROZEPUR vs. MEASAGE OM SONS MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDKOT

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

ITA 407/ASR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

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

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 37(1)Section 56(2)(viib)

disallowance was sustained on account of excess claim of depreciation. 3.5. Being aggrieved on appeal order the revenue has filed appeal before us by challenging the relief granted on amount of Rs. 3,38,60,465/- and Rs. 2,38,149/- by the ld. CIT(A). 4. The ld. AR filed written submissions which are kept in the record

SH. BARAT PAL SOOD,,PHAGWARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,, PHAGWARA

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

ITA 11/ASR/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Feb 2020AY 2009-2010
For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Vijh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, DR
Section 143(3)

disallowance of interest on interest free loan/advance to daughter at Rs.88,855/-, on account of undeclared house property Income at Rs.1,17,600/- and on account of undeclared bank interest Income at Rs.34,242/-, respectively. Accordingly, the AO 3 completed the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act dated 23.12.2011 assessing total income at Rs.22,55,590/-. 4. Feeling aggrieved from

M/S. CHAUDHARY ENTERPRISES,,BATHINDA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BATHINDA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed on the afore-said terms

ITA 578/ASR/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 578/Asr/2013 Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwini Kalia (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) dated 02.12.2010 for Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09. 2. The first issue raised in appeal is qua an addition in the sum of Rs.4,14,900/- on account of difference in the charges receivable as per the assessee’s accounts and that as per the tax deduction statement