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.

5,005 results for “disallowance”+ Addition to Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai22,443 Delhi17,038 Kolkata6,123 Chennai5,901 Bangalore5,005 Ahmedabad4,194 Pune3,797 Hyderabad2,661 Jaipur2,274 Chandigarh1,542 Surat1,349 Indore1,277 Cochin989 Visakhapatnam930 Raipur782 Cuttack767 Amritsar658 Rajkot609 Nagpur589 Lucknow510 Karnataka386 Agra296 Jodhpur282 Ranchi259 Guwahati258 Panaji227 Patna175 Dehradun152 Telangana149 Allahabad142 Jabalpur137 Calcutta123 SC92 Varanasi63 Kerala47 Punjab & Haryana26 Rajasthan11 Orissa10 Himachal Pradesh4 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3 Gauhati2 Uttarakhand2 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1 Tripura1 Bombay1 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Addition to Income73 Disallowance56 Deduction41 Section 143(3)40 Depreciation26 Section 139(1)25 Section 1124 Section 14822 Section 143(1)22 Section 14A

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 62/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Additional Income offered Disallowance 1 2011-12 5,50,00,000 Bogus Purchase 2 2012-13 5„50,00,000 Bogus

Showing 1–20 of 5,005 · Page 1 of 251

...

20

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 65/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Additional Income offered Disallowance 1 2011-12 5,50,00,000 Bogus Purchase 2 2012-13 5„50,00,000 Bogus

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 64/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Additional Income offered Disallowance 1 2011-12 5,50,00,000 Bogus Purchase 2 2012-13 5„50,00,000 Bogus

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 63/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Additional Income offered Disallowance 1 2011-12 5,50,00,000 Bogus Purchase 2 2012-13 5„50,00,000 Bogus

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 66/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Additional Income offered Disallowance 1 2011-12 5,50,00,000 Bogus Purchase 2 2012-13 5„50,00,000 Bogus

MR. YUNUS ZIA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 126/BANG/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Mar 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri A. K. Garodia

For Appellant: Shri. S. Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 154

income of the assessee under section 153A of the Act, additions or disallowances can be made only on the basis

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

ITA 312/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &

Addition Details made by AO (in lacs) 1 Unexplained opening capital 33.29 2. Agricultural income declared by the assessee treated as 12.60 taxable income 3. Disallowance

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

ITA 308/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &

Addition Details made by AO (in lacs) 1 Unexplained opening capital 33.29 2. Agricultural income declared by the assessee treated as 12.60 taxable income 3. Disallowance

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

ITA 310/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &

Addition Details made by AO (in lacs) 1 Unexplained opening capital 33.29 2. Agricultural income declared by the assessee treated as 12.60 taxable income 3. Disallowance

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

ITA 309/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &

Addition Details made by AO (in lacs) 1 Unexplained opening capital 33.29 2. Agricultural income declared by the assessee treated as 12.60 taxable income 3. Disallowance

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

ITA 311/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &

Addition Details made by AO (in lacs) 1 Unexplained opening capital 33.29 2. Agricultural income declared by the assessee treated as 12.60 taxable income 3. Disallowance

K. G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

ITA 307/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &

Addition Details made by AO (in lacs) 1 Unexplained opening capital 33.29 2. Agricultural income declared by the assessee treated as 12.60 taxable income 3. Disallowance

M/S KBL LAYOUT,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 709/BANG/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Dec 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Nischal, D.R

Section 132Section 153C

disallowed. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) has enhanced the income by Rs.57,81,981/- and total income determined at Rs.1,11,22,908/-. Against this the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. Ground No.1 is very general in nature, which do not require any adjudication. 5. Ground No.2 is corelated to the other grounds of appeal on additions

M/S. UNITED BREWERIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 308/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ankur Pai, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Saravanan B., DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 14ASection 250Section 92C

Disallowance of sponsorship expenses 92,33,00,000 Depreciation on goodwill 1,18,29,983 The AO accordingly proposed to assess the income of the assessee at Rs.640,40,30,225/- against the income of Rs.461,47,05,660/- declared by the assessee in its returned income. The assessee being aggrieved by the additions

UNITED BREWERIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE- 7, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 345/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ankur Pai, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Saravanan B., DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 14ASection 250Section 92C

Disallowance of sponsorship expenses 92,33,00,000 Depreciation on goodwill 1,18,29,983 The AO accordingly proposed to assess the income of the assessee at Rs.640,40,30,225/- against the income of Rs.461,47,05,660/- declared by the assessee in its returned income. The assessee being aggrieved by the additions

RAGHURAM ENTERPRISES,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1836/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian, JCIT

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 250Section 271(1)(c)

income returned by the assessee without making any addition or disallowance over and above the returned income. 13.2 In identical

RAGHURAM ENTERPRISES,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3),, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1838/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian, JCIT

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 250Section 271(1)(c)

income returned by the assessee without making any addition or disallowance over and above the returned income. 13.2 In identical

RAGHURAM ENTERPRISES,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1839/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian, JCIT

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 250Section 271(1)(c)

income returned by the assessee without making any addition or disallowance over and above the returned income. 13.2 In identical

RAGHURAM ENTERPRISES ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1835/BANG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian, JCIT

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 250Section 271(1)(c)

income returned by the assessee without making any addition or disallowance over and above the returned income. 13.2 In identical

RAGHURAM ENTERPRISES ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1837/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian, JCIT

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 250Section 271(1)(c)

income returned by the assessee without making any addition or disallowance over and above the returned income. 13.2 In identical