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 40A(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,530 Mumbai1,502 Chennai670 Kolkata658 Bangalore547 Ahmedabad230 Pune196 Hyderabad173 Jaipur152 Raipur126 Surat119 Indore98 Amritsar88 Chandigarh75 Nagpur57 Cuttack54 Visakhapatnam52 Rajkot47 Cochin43 Lucknow41 Karnataka31 Agra28 Allahabad24 Jodhpur22 Patna19 Dehradun16 Guwahati16 SC12 Varanasi9 Calcutta8 Ranchi5 Telangana4 Jabalpur3 Kerala2 Panaji2 Punjab & Haryana2 Rajasthan1 J&K1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Addition to Income74 Section 40A(3)68 Section 14466 Disallowance65 Section 1155 Section 13(3)55 Section 250(6)43 Natural Justice39 Section 143(3)37 Depreciation

THE AZAD NAKODAR BUS SERVICE PRIVATE LIMITED,NAKODAR vs. DEPUTY COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAC CIRCL-4E, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 107/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

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

Section 40(3)Section 40A(3)

section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Disallowance under section 40A(3) could not be made as identity

DUPTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BATHINDA vs. SH. VINOD ARORA, , BATHINDA

ITA 489/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

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

Sh. P. N. Arora, Advocate

Showing 1–20 of 88 · Page 1 of 5

36

For Appellant:

For Respondent: Sh. Trilochan Singh PS Khalsa, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(3)

disallowance under sub-section (3) of section 40A shall be made and no payment shall be deemed to be the profits

THE DCIT, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST, JALANDHAR

ITA 39/ASR/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 2003-04

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

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

disallow the expenditure under Section 40A(2). 12. Burden of proof lies on the Revenue to prove that the salary/rental payments made were excessive/unreasonable and that provisions of section 13 apply: Section 13 starts with a non-obstante clause and hence by virtue of the said provisions, exception to the exemption provided by section 11, is carved

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST, JALANDHAR

ITA 177/ASR/2006[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 2001-02

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

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

disallow the expenditure under Section 40A(2). 12. Burden of proof lies on the Revenue to prove that the salary/rental payments made were excessive/unreasonable and that provisions of section 13 apply: Section 13 starts with a non-obstante clause and hence by virtue of the said provisions, exception to the exemption provided by section 11, is carved

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST, JALANDHAR

ITA 261/ASR/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 1999-2000

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

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

disallow the expenditure under Section 40A(2). 12. Burden of proof lies on the Revenue to prove that the salary/rental payments made were excessive/unreasonable and that provisions of section 13 apply: Section 13 starts with a non-obstante clause and hence by virtue of the said provisions, exception to the exemption provided by section 11, is carved

DCIT, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST, JALANDHAR

ITA 328/ASR/2007[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 2004-05

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

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

disallow the expenditure under Section 40A(2). 12. Burden of proof lies on the Revenue to prove that the salary/rental payments made were excessive/unreasonable and that provisions of section 13 apply: Section 13 starts with a non-obstante clause and hence by virtue of the said provisions, exception to the exemption provided by section 11, is carved

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST, JALANDHAR

ITA 272/ASR/2004[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 1997-98

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

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

disallow the expenditure under Section 40A(2). 12. Burden of proof lies on the Revenue to prove that the salary/rental payments made were excessive/unreasonable and that provisions of section 13 apply: Section 13 starts with a non-obstante clause and hence by virtue of the said provisions, exception to the exemption provided by section 11, is carved

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST,, JALANDHAR

ITA 344/ASR/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

disallow the expenditure under Section 40A(2). 12. Burden of proof lies on the Revenue to prove that the salary/rental payments made were excessive/unreasonable and that provisions of section 13 apply: Section 13 starts with a non-obstante clause and hence by virtue of the said provisions, exception to the exemption provided by section 11, is carved

M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST,JALANDHAR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

ITA 185/ASR/2001[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 1994-95

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

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

disallow the expenditure under Section 40A(2). 12. Burden of proof lies on the Revenue to prove that the salary/rental payments made were excessive/unreasonable and that provisions of section 13 apply: Section 13 starts with a non-obstante clause and hence by virtue of the said provisions, exception to the exemption provided by section 11, is carved

M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST,JALANDHAR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

ITA 184/ASR/2001[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 1993-94

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

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

disallow the expenditure under Section 40A(2). 12. Burden of proof lies on the Revenue to prove that the salary/rental payments made were excessive/unreasonable and that provisions of section 13 apply: Section 13 starts with a non-obstante clause and hence by virtue of the said provisions, exception to the exemption provided by section 11, is carved

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST, JALANDHAR

ITA 421/ASR/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 2006-07

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

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

disallow the expenditure under Section 40A(2). 12. Burden of proof lies on the Revenue to prove that the salary/rental payments made were excessive/unreasonable and that provisions of section 13 apply: Section 13 starts with a non-obstante clause and hence by virtue of the said provisions, exception to the exemption provided by section 11, is carved

M/S SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST,JALANDHAR vs. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

ITA 129/ASR/2002[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 1998-99

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

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

disallow the expenditure under Section 40A(2). 12. Burden of proof lies on the Revenue to prove that the salary/rental payments made were excessive/unreasonable and that provisions of section 13 apply: Section 13 starts with a non-obstante clause and hence by virtue of the said provisions, exception to the exemption provided by section 11, is carved

M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST,JALANDHAR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

ITA 186/ASR/2001[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 1994-95

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

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

disallow the expenditure under Section 40A(2). 12. Burden of proof lies on the Revenue to prove that the salary/rental payments made were excessive/unreasonable and that provisions of section 13 apply: Section 13 starts with a non-obstante clause and hence by virtue of the said provisions, exception to the exemption provided by section 11, is carved

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 (2), BATHINDA vs. M/ S ALTIUS SALES PRIVATE LIMITED, BATHINDA

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

ITA 709/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 40ASection 40A(3)Section 44A

section 40A(3) of the act are not violated and no disallowance is called for. Accordingly the disallowance of Rs 185,11,610/- u/s 40A

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, SAMBA vs. SH. ASHOK KUMAR SHARMA, SAMBA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in Ground nos

ITA 475/ASR/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.475/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 40Section 80I

section 40A(3) of the Act by issuing bearer cheques. The appellant, on the other hand, has given detailed explanations against each party and admitted to have issued bearer cheques in some cases due to business expediency but claimed to have been duly reflected in the books of account. The appellant has also claimed that any disallowances

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

40A(3) becomes redundant. As regards the disallowance u/s 69C, the said section is not applicable in the case of the assessee

SH. ANUP KUMAR JAITLY,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -3(1), JALANDHAR

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

ITA 112/ASR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Ghansham Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 133Section 143(3)Section 3Section 40A(3)

disallowance under sub-section (3) of section 40A shall be made and no payment shall be deemed to be the profits

VARINDERA OVERSEAS (P) LTD,LUDHIANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1, JALANDHAR

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

ITA 713/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 May 2022AY 2006-07

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR

Section 40ASection 40A(3)

section 40A(3) of the Act without specifying the transactions against which the cash payment has been made and the name of the parties to whom the cash payment has 3 Varindera Overseas (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT been made. He has argued that the such disallowances

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)

disallowance under section 40A(3) was to be made only 20% of the amount paid in cash was to be disallowed

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