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.

3 results for “disallowance”+ Section 246(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai333Delhi162Jaipur67Chennai66Bangalore51Raipur36Chandigarh25Kolkata25Hyderabad21Lucknow20Pune19Indore14SC14Nagpur13Ahmedabad12Jodhpur8Rajkot8Cuttack7Surat7Cochin5Visakhapatnam4Allahabad4Patna4Amritsar3Panaji2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Jabalpur1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 1474Section 364Section 36(1)(iii)4Section 1484Addition to Income3Disallowance2

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 3, SRINAGAR vs. MEASAGE SAIFCO CEEMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Department and CO of the Assesse is 23

ITA 451/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar23 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Rajiv Wadhera, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

disallowed under section 36(1)(iii) - Held, yes [Paras 7 & 11][In favour of revenue] (f) The Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT vs. K.s. Dattatreya [2011) 197 taxman 151 has held that- "as a revisional authority commissioner appeals can revise not only the ultimate computation arrived at but every process which lead

SHRI AMRIK SINGH,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4 (1), AMRITSAR

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

ITA 170/ASR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

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

Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

1,50,000) and Sh. Ramandeep Singh (Rs. 2,26,000/-). Also, the assessee had incurred financial cost (bank charges, interest CC account, interest car loan) to the extent of Rs. 9,42,418/- on borrowings. The AR was asked to justify as why proportionate disallowance of interest may not be made u/s 36(l)(iii) on account of interest

M/S JAMMU COOPERATIVE WHOLE SALE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 (1), JAMMU

ITA 150/ASR/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Jun 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 150/Asr/2020 Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/S Jammu Cooperative Whole Sale The Ito Limited (Super Bazar) Old Hospital Ward-2(1) Road, City Chowk, Jammu- Jammu 180001(J&K)-180001

For Appellant: None
Section 147Section 148Section 152Section 40A(3)

246 to 248 or under section 264, to claim that the proceedings under section 147 should be dropped on his showing that he had been assessed on an amount or to a sum not lower than what he would be rightly liable for even if the income alleged to have escaped assessment had been taken into account, or the assessment