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.

2 results for “disallowance”+ Section 92Eclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai166Delhi106Bangalore42Kolkata28Ahmedabad19Pune18Chennai17Jaipur14Hyderabad14Indore3Varanasi2Amritsar2Chandigarh2Karnataka2Jodhpur1Jabalpur1Nagpur1Himachal Pradesh1Surat1Telangana1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 92E2Disallowance2Addition to Income2

M/S ESS ESS KAY ENGG. CO.P LTD ,KAPURTHALA vs. DEPUTY COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE IV, JALANDHAR

In the result, the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 178/ASR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Vatta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR
Section 92E

92E of the IT Act duly certified by a chartered accountant. 3. The CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the submissions of the assessee regarding the complete details of the quantity wise sales made to the Ess Ess Kay Marketing Co. at a higher MRP. 4. The CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of ITO thereby disallowing

MESERS ESS ESS ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,KAPURTHALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE IV, JALANDHAR

In the result, the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 400/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: Disposed
ITAT Amritsar
02 Mar 2023
AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Vatta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR
Section 92E

92E of the IT Act duly certified by a chartered accountant. 3. The CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the submissions of the assessee regarding the complete details of the quantity wise sales made to the Ess Ess Kay Marketing Co. at a higher MRP. 4. The CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of ITO thereby disallowing