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 3clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai22,679Delhi17,086Chennai6,569Kolkata6,160Bangalore5,798Ahmedabad2,802Pune2,318Hyderabad2,110Jaipur1,523Surat1,202Chandigarh975Indore972Cochin814Karnataka795Raipur659Rajkot626Visakhapatnam557Nagpur504Lucknow469Amritsar440Cuttack408Panaji286Agra232Jodhpur223Telangana222Calcutta205Patna190Guwahati188Ranchi187Dehradun154SC152Allahabad109Jabalpur107Kerala75Varanasi59Punjab & Haryana44Orissa20Rajasthan11Himachal Pradesh8A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN7Gauhati2Andhra Pradesh2Uttarakhand2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1J&K1Tripura1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Bombay1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)3Section 2602

SRI MAHESH GURRAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

ITTA/20/2024HC Andhra Pradesh22 Aug 2024

Bench: G.NARENDAR,KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

For Respondent: SRI VIJAY KUMAR PUNNA (STANDING
Section 12ASection 138Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 151Section 23Section 260

3) of the Act, assessing the total income of the Appellant at Rs.1,11,69,494/- and raising demand of tax payable at Rs.44,71,940/-, pending disposal of the appeal. :SRI MUDUNURU YESHWANTH VARMA Counsel for the Appellant Counsel for the Respondent : SRI VIJAY KUMAR PUNNA (STANDING COUNSEL FOR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT) The Court made the following JUDGMENT

M/S MERIDIAN PROMOTERS (P) lTD., vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the Appeal is allowed and the order, dated 26

ITTA/157/2019HC Andhra Pradesh17 Oct 2019

Bench: The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) In Ita.No.0782/Cc-2,Vizag/Cit(A)-

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 260A

Section 142(1) of the Act was issued. Ultimately, the respondent had disallowed Rs.37,23,478/- inter alia for the reason that the appellant had not produced sufficient information and/or the information produced by the appellant is not acceptable. When the appellant submitted the vouchers for the said amount claimed by the appellant, the respondent rejected the same assigning