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.

40 results for “disallowance”+ Section 69Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai621Delhi496Jaipur194Ahmedabad172Chennai147Bangalore139Hyderabad121Kolkata117Chandigarh97Pune84Rajkot79Cochin70Indore67Surat67Amritsar40Lucknow37Nagpur36Visakhapatnam35Agra25Raipur25Jodhpur23Cuttack22Patna19Guwahati18Allahabad16Jabalpur10Dehradun6Varanasi6Ranchi5Panaji3Karnataka3Rajasthan1SC1Kerala1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 153A42Addition to Income39Section 69A33Section 25029Undisclosed Income21Section 6816Section 14715Section 26315Section 153C14Section 143(3)

M/S ACTIVE TOOLS (P). LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, JALANDHAR

ITA 260/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 115Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 154Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69BSection 69CSection 69D

69A—As regards business losses incurred by Assessee during year, these could be set off against income surrendered during course of survey except for amount of cash surrendered, as per mandate of section 71 –No loss could be set off against cash surrendered as same had already been held to be taxed under different head—AO was hereby directed

Showing 1–20 of 40 · Page 1 of 2

13
Cash Deposit9
Disallowance6

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH, CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

ITA 347/ASR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, C. A
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 144Section 144rSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 68

69A, read with section 10(38), of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained moneys (Share dealings) - High Court by impugned order held that where Assessing Officer disallowed

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH. CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

ITA 346/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, C. A
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 144Section 144rSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 68

69A, read with section 10(38), of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained moneys (Share dealings) - High Court by impugned order held that where Assessing Officer disallowed

KUNAL ARORA,AMRITSAR vs. AO WARD 5 (3), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 472/ASR/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Handa, C. A
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

section 69A of the Income Tax Act 1961.” 3. Brief facts in this case is that the assessee is engaged in the business of retail distribution of M.S. and HSD, and is running a petrol pump. The only issue in this case is that as per Government Notification during demonetization period, the petrol pump dealers were allowed to accept

MESERS SUPERTECH FORGINGS(INDIA) PVT.LTD.,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE IV, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 563/ASR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 147

69A, read with section 147, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained money (Cash) - Assessment year 2012-13 - One of Directors of assessee company namely 'A' was carrying Rs. 5 lakhs from Delhi to Ghaziabad for payment of wages and other normal expenses - 'A' was stopped by UP Police on border of Delhi and said cash was seized - On basis

SHRI RAJ KUMAR ( M/S RADHIKA SALES CORP ), AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 3 (3), AMRITSAR

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

ITA 195/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250oSection 68

disallowance. ii. Paramount Impex v. AC IT, Circle-J, Ludhiana [2020] 117 taxmann.com 802 (Chandigarh Trib.) Section 145 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 - Method of accounting - Rejection of Account (Non-maintenance of stock register) - Assessment year 2013-14 - Whether where assessee was dealing in a large number of small items and it was consistently following method of determining stock

EMM. KAY ELECTRICALS,,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

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

ITA 208/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar08 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Sandeep Vijh, CA
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234ASection 250(6)Section 69A

disallowance of claim of business loss ( arising out of forfeiture of advance payment ) and also by assessing the surrendered income of Rs. 2.5 crores to be taxed u/s 69A of the Act. 4) The matter carried in appeal before the Ld CIT ( A) , has been disposed off, by admitting the contention of the assessee on the issue of section

SH. MANINDER SINGH CHEEMA,HOSHIARPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HOSHIARPUR

In the result, the assessee appeal is dismissed

ITA 702/ASR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 702/Asr/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-10

Section 133A

disallowance of Rs. 14,15,788/- confirmed by learned CIT(A) is uncalled for since Rs. 83,00,000/- were surrendered towards development cost of Kartar Estate Pvt. Ltd. It was submitted that this amount has to, be added in the trading account and would result in increased cost of saleable area of the year under consideration. 11. Per contra

SHRI SUKHBIR SINGH BEDI,GURDASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, GURDASPUR

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

ITA 122/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri P.N. AroraFor Respondent: Shri Pardeep Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271A(1)(d)Section 272ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 69A

disallowance of Rs.35,00,000/- u/s 69A. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant is on appeal. 4. The hearing in this case was fixed on the following dates with due intimation electronically: I.T.A. No. 122/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 4 SL. NO. SL. NO. SL. NO. SL. NO. DATE OF NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE

THE ASSISATANT COMMISSIOENR OF INCOME-TAX,, HOSHIARPUR vs. SH. MANINDER SINGH CHEEMA, HOSHIARPUR

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 719/ASR/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 719/Asr/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev K. Gubgotra (D.R.)For Respondent: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, (C.A.)
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

disallowing the excessive agriculture income claimed by the assessee in the absence of any evidence for the sale of agricultural produce.’ 3. The first ground is in respect of an addition for Rs.10 lacs made u/s. 68 of the Act. The assessee, an agriculturist and colonizer, was during the relevant year engaged in development of a colony by the name

SANGAM TRADERS 60-GOLDEN AVENUE SAILI ROAD PATHANKOT,PATHANKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 PATHANKOT SAILI ROAD PATHANKOT, PATHANKOT

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

ITA 706/ASR/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Jan 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv
Section 144Section 249(3)Section 250Section 68

disallowance of direct and indirect expenses, and addition u/s 68 and 69A, on account of unsecured loans, unexplained cash deposits and capital introduction, etc.). 4. The matter carried in appeal before the ld. first appellate authority has been dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) without admitting the appeal for adjudication on merits due to the reasons that the appeal

SHRI OM PARKASH LEGAL HEIAR SMT PUSHPA VERMA,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(3), JALANDHAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 756/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 756/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 41(1)Section 41(1)(a)Section 68

disallowed as an expenditure for the year in which it is incurred, contracting a ‘liability’ in its respect and, even otherwise, the ‘benefit’ in its respect arising in that year itself, even as explained in Jain Exports (P.) Ltd. (supra). In fact, in the facts of the present case, the ld. CIT(A) has, in view of the assessee having

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. ANKUSH MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 391/ASR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

disallowance could be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A and earlier assessment should have to be reiterated—There was no such statement in present case which said to constitute an admission by Assessee of failure to record any transaction in accounts of Assessee for AYs in question—Court was of view that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. ANKUR MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 266/ASR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

disallowance could be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A and earlier assessment should have to be reiterated—There was no such statement in present case which said to constitute an admission by Assessee of failure to record any transaction in accounts of Assessee for AYs in question—Court was of view that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. RAJNI MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 250/ASR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

disallowance could be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A and earlier assessment should have to be reiterated—There was no such statement in present case which said to constitute an admission by Assessee of failure to record any transaction in accounts of Assessee for AYs in question—Court was of view that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. ANKUR MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 265/ASR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

disallowance could be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A and earlier assessment should have to be reiterated—There was no such statement in present case which said to constitute an admission by Assessee of failure to record any transaction in accounts of Assessee for AYs in question—Court was of view that

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. RAJNI MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 196/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

disallowance could be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A and earlier assessment should have to be reiterated—There was no such statement in present case which said to constitute an admission by Assessee of failure to record any transaction in accounts of Assessee for AYs in question—Court was of view that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. ANKUSH MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 392/ASR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

disallowance could be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A and earlier assessment should have to be reiterated—There was no such statement in present case which said to constitute an admission by Assessee of failure to record any transaction in accounts of Assessee for AYs in question—Court was of view that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. RAJNI MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 251/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

disallowance could be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A and earlier assessment should have to be reiterated—There was no such statement in present case which said to constitute an admission by Assessee of failure to record any transaction in accounts of Assessee for AYs in question—Court was of view that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. ANKUR MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 389/ASR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

disallowance could be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A and earlier assessment should have to be reiterated—There was no such statement in present case which said to constitute an admission by Assessee of failure to record any transaction in accounts of Assessee for AYs in question—Court was of view that