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.

17 results for “disallowance”+ Section 215clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai894Delhi709Chennai297Bangalore210Ahmedabad128Kolkata122Jaipur103Agra78Hyderabad74Chandigarh57Pune39Indore35Raipur32Surat31Rajkot28Visakhapatnam20Amritsar17Lucknow17Karnataka15Panaji11Jabalpur10Cochin9Jodhpur9Cuttack8SC8Guwahati6Telangana4Dehradun4Allahabad3Varanasi2Himachal Pradesh1Nagpur1Orissa1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Patna1Calcutta1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 80I19Deduction14Section 143(1)12Section 139(1)10Section 143(3)9Addition to Income9Section 36(1)(va)8Section 2(24)(x)8Section 2636

SATIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUKTSAR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE I, BATHINDA, BATHINDA

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

ITA 702/ASR/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Kapoor, Adv. &
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(2)Section 144C(5)Section 80Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

disallowing assessee’s claim on said ground - Held, yes - Whether as regards second ground, incomes and expenditures which were not directly relatable to industrial unit 25 I.T.A. No. 702/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 had to be ignored and, therefore, Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified in allocating indirect expenses not directly relatable to industrial unit of assessee for purpose of computation

Disallowance6
Section 43B4

J.M.C PLYWOOD,GORAYA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, PHAGWARA

In the result, the disallowances confirmed by the NFAC/CIT(A) related to ITA No

ITA 4/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowances made in the order passed u/s 143(1) of the Act was challenged before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO. The observations of CIT(A) in Page no. 6-7 of the impugned order are as follows:- “4.3.3 it is relevant to refer to the following case laws which have been decided against

M/S DIAMOND RED TANNERIES,KAPURTHALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the disallowances confirmed by the NFAC/CIT(A) related to ITA No

ITA 21/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowances made in the order passed u/s 143(1) of the Act was challenged before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO. The observations of CIT(A) in Page no. 6-7 of the impugned order are as follows:- “4.3.3 it is relevant to refer to the following case laws which have been decided against

KHALSA BAKERY ,KAPUTHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -4 (2), JALANDHAR

In the result, the disallowances confirmed by the NFAC/CIT(A) related to ITA No

ITA 20/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowances made in the order passed u/s 143(1) of the Act was challenged before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO. The observations of CIT(A) in Page no. 6-7 of the impugned order are as follows:- “4.3.3 it is relevant to refer to the following case laws which have been decided against

VAAHO AGENCIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1 ( 1 ) , AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee related all grounds of ITA No

ITA 30/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Sh. Jatinder Arora (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Satbir Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Section 2(24)(x) rws 36(1)(va) of the Act, as the employees contribution is to be paid within the due date of payment as prescribed in the respective Acts (PF/ESI Acts) to claim deduction. The assessee paid the amount before filing of Income tax Return U/s 139(1) of the Act but not within the stipulated dates under

SH. SADA RAM CHAWLA,TARN TARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), TARNTARAN

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

ITA 479/ASR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Ravish Sood & Dr. M. L. Meena

For Appellant: Sh. Nipun Khanna, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mehra, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40a

section 194H and since no tax was deducted by disallowing the same u/s. 40a(ia) whereas the Appellant is not having any payer and payee relationship with the retailers as retailers are not providing any services to the company and not to the appellant. The Appellant is only transferring/redistributing money received from Reliance as per their directions 3. That

SATIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUKTSAR, PUNJAB vs. DCIT, ACIT CIRCLE 1, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 527/ASR/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 527/Asr/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: S/Shri Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Shri K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 80

disallowing assessee's claim on said ground - Held, yes - Whether as regards second ground, incomes and expenditures which were not directly relatable to industrial unit had to be ignored and, therefore, Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified in allocating indirect expenses not directly relatable to industrial unit of assessee for purpose of computation of its income for deduction under section

WALIA CONSTRUCATION COMPANY ,PATHANKOT vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, AMRITSAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 139/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263

disallowance was made @ 5% on the expenses. The ld. AO accepted the rate of depreciation of the assessee. The ld. PCIT by invoking the section 263 issued the notice and asked assessee for claiming depreciation @ 30% which is amount to Rs.3,51,34,432/- on written down value of the tipper. Whereas, the ld. PCIT supposed to allow the claim

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. MBD. PRINTOGRAPHICS P.LTD,, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals of department and that of assessee stand dismissed

ITA 507/ASR/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 80I

section 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the groundsof appeal on or before is heard and disposed-off.” The Tribunal decided the above ITA’s in a consolidated order dated 8. 28.12.2012 and also the order for the assessment year 2010-11 in ITA No. 621/2014 vide order dated

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. MBD. PRINTOGRAPHICS P.LTD,, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals of department and that of assessee stand dismissed

ITA 508/ASR/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 80I

section 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the groundsof appeal on or before is heard and disposed-off.” The Tribunal decided the above ITA’s in a consolidated order dated 8. 28.12.2012 and also the order for the assessment year 2010-11 in ITA No. 621/2014 vide order dated

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. MBD PRINTOGRAPHICS P.LTD,, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals of department and that of assessee stand dismissed

ITA 533/ASR/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 80I

section 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the groundsof appeal on or before is heard and disposed-off.” The Tribunal decided the above ITA’s in a consolidated order dated 8. 28.12.2012 and also the order for the assessment year 2010-11 in ITA No. 621/2014 vide order dated

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. MBD PRINTOGRAPHICS PVT. LTD,, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals of department and that of assessee stand dismissed

ITA 534/ASR/2011[2009-1]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 80I

section 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the groundsof appeal on or before is heard and disposed-off.” The Tribunal decided the above ITA’s in a consolidated order dated 8. 28.12.2012 and also the order for the assessment year 2010-11 in ITA No. 621/2014 vide order dated

M/S. MBD PRINTOGRAPHICS PVT LTD,JALANDHAR vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals of department and that of assessee stand dismissed

ITA 534/ASR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 80I

section 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the groundsof appeal on or before is heard and disposed-off.” The Tribunal decided the above ITA’s in a consolidated order dated 8. 28.12.2012 and also the order for the assessment year 2010-11 in ITA No. 621/2014 vide order dated

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. MBD PRINTOGRAPHICS P.LTD.,, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals of department and that of assessee stand dismissed

ITA 27/ASR/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 80I

section 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the groundsof appeal on or before is heard and disposed-off.” The Tribunal decided the above ITA’s in a consolidated order dated 8. 28.12.2012 and also the order for the assessment year 2010-11 in ITA No. 621/2014 vide order dated

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. MBD PRINTOGRAPHICS PVT. LTD,, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals of department and that of assessee stand dismissed

ITA 621/ASR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 80I

section 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the groundsof appeal on or before is heard and disposed-off.” The Tribunal decided the above ITA’s in a consolidated order dated 8. 28.12.2012 and also the order for the assessment year 2010-11 in ITA No. 621/2014 vide order dated

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. MBD. PRINTOGRAPHICS P.LTD,, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals of department and that of assessee stand dismissed

ITA 506/ASR/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 80I

section 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the groundsof appeal on or before is heard and disposed-off.” The Tribunal decided the above ITA’s in a consolidated order dated 8. 28.12.2012 and also the order for the assessment year 2010-11 in ITA No. 621/2014 vide order dated

GURU NANAK MILK PRODUCTS ,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

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

ITA 132/ASR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

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

Section 132Section 133Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153BSection 153CSection 250(6)

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act and required to be capitalised with the cost of immovable properties. Therefore an addition of Rs. 41,44,372/- being 50% of the interest claimed is hereby added of total income of the assessee .…….” Sir, in this regard it submitted as under: 1. That modus operandi of assessee’s business model is that