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.

4,876 results for “disallowance”+ Business Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai19,747 Delhi13,512 Chennai5,594 Kolkata5,127 Bangalore4,876 Ahmedabad3,398 Pune3,097 Hyderabad2,312 Jaipur1,726 Cochin1,188 Chandigarh1,053 Surat1,020 Indore904 Visakhapatnam702 Raipur670 Cuttack646 Karnataka554 Rajkot524 Nagpur474 Lucknow381 Amritsar374 Panaji271 Agra213 Guwahati188 Jodhpur188 Ranchi170 Telangana166 Patna142 Dehradun136 Allahabad114 Calcutta112 SC105 Jabalpur90 Kerala66 Varanasi53 Punjab & Haryana27 Orissa12 Rajasthan9 Himachal Pradesh4 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 Andhra Pradesh1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Bombay1 Gauhati1 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 J&K1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1 Tripura1

Key Topics

Addition to Income53 Disallowance50 Section 143(3)46 Deduction45 Section 26327 Section 14826 Section 14A24 Depreciation24 Section 10A23 Section 143(2)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. INFOSYS LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 245/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Sri Padam Chand Khincha – CAFor Respondent: Smt. Srinandini Das – CIT - DR

Section 1Section 10ASection 155Section 250

Income form Business and Profession”. The effect of such disallowance would lead to increase in Business income. Thereafter benefit accruing

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2)(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S. NITESH INFRASTRUCTURE & CONSTRUCTIONS, BANGALORE

Showing 1–20 of 4,876 · Page 1 of 244

...

19

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1039/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri H. Kabila, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), BenglauruFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 148

disallowed in this year) and ignoring the revised return of income, under which there is claim of tax refund arising from charge of depreciation. Similarly, the assessee had filed returns for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 showing the rental income as "income from business

M/S. ETA STAR INFOPARK,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, BENGALURU

ITA 415/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Annamalai, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263

income, as returned by the appellant and disallowed the general & establishment expenses due to NIL business income and no business

M/S. ETA STAR INFOPARK,BENGALURU vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU-1, BENGALURU

ITA 248/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Annamalai, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263

income, as returned by the appellant and disallowed the general & establishment expenses due to NIL business income and no business

M/S CESSNA GARDEN DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2097/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Lalit Kumarassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Susan D. George, CIT (DR-I)

Section 24Section 28Section 37

business income and why it should not be disallowed. In response to that the assessee, has mentioned as under. “Your

THE KARNATAKA STATE COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT BANK LIMITED ,BANGLAORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BENGALURU

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1821/BANG/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Apr 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Bhardwaj Sheshadri, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Subramanian, JCIT (DR)

Section 250Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

business income by adding ₹ 1,15,39,244/- & ₹3,12,323/- to the returned income but failed to allow deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on such enhanced income. It was submitted that the disallowance

M/S. EMBASSY KNOWLEDGE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 982/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjay Kumar S.R., CIT –DR

Section 143(2)Section 24Section 3

business income as disclosed by the assessee. The A.O. further held that depreciation is not allowable since the income has to be assessed under the head “income from house property”. Further, the A.O. added a sum of Rs.8,63,056 incurred towards repairs and maintenance expenses to the rental income for the reason that the assessee has not provided

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S WIPRO LTD.,, BANGALORE

ITA 609/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accountantmember & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.99/Bang/2014 Assessmentyear:2009-10

business income from non-STPI/non-SEZ units:- 4.1 This issue is urged by the assessee and it relates to disallowance

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S WIPRO LTD.,, BANGALORE

ITA 467/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accountantmember & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.99/Bang/2014 Assessmentyear:2009-10

business income from non-STPI/non-SEZ units:- 4.1 This issue is urged by the assessee and it relates to disallowance

SHRI. MUNINAGA REDDY,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for A

ITA 859/BANG/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jan 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri P. Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 54BSection 80C

business and other sources. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act by order dt.15.12.2008 wherein the income of the assessee was determined at Rs.5,45,59,686. Penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act were simultaneously initiated. The assessment was completed making the following additions / disallowances

INSTAKART SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, SPECIAL RANGE-3, BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 544/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate and Ms. AnkitaFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT

disallowances of the claim representing business loss for Rs. 772,75,51,806/- only. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee, a private company, is engaged in the business of logistics, courier and allied services. For the year under consideration, the assessee declared a loss of Rs. 768,38,95,521/- after setoff of income

G N VENUGOPAL,DEVANAHALLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee for all these assessment years are partly allowed

ITA 306/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm

Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

disallowance made in the order passed u/s.153A rws 143(3). 6.2. Further the A.O. has not brought any fresh material out of search proceedings as contemplated u/s.153A of the Act and no addition is made out of the search material as the addition/disallowance made in 153A proceedings are purely a change of opinion on the Income declared in the Return

G N VENUGOPAL,DEVANAHALLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee for all these assessment years are partly allowed

ITA 303/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm

Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

disallowance made in the order passed u/s.153A rws 143(3). 6.2. Further the A.O. has not brought any fresh material out of search proceedings as contemplated u/s.153A of the Act and no addition is made out of the search material as the addition/disallowance made in 153A proceedings are purely a change of opinion on the Income declared in the Return

G N VENUGOPAL,DEVANAHALLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee for all these assessment years are partly allowed

ITA 304/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm

Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

disallowance made in the order passed u/s.153A rws 143(3). 6.2. Further the A.O. has not brought any fresh material out of search proceedings as contemplated u/s.153A of the Act and no addition is made out of the search material as the addition/disallowance made in 153A proceedings are purely a change of opinion on the Income declared in the Return

G N VENUGOPAL,DEVANAHALLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee for all these assessment years are partly allowed

ITA 305/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm

Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

disallowance made in the order passed u/s.153A rws 143(3). 6.2. Further the A.O. has not brought any fresh material out of search proceedings as contemplated u/s.153A of the Act and no addition is made out of the search material as the addition/disallowance made in 153A proceedings are purely a change of opinion on the Income declared in the Return

M/S. ALLSTATE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 257/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Shridhar Hegde, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, D.R

Section 10ASection 139

disallowance of deduction under section 10AA of the Act for interest income earned by the Appellant. 4. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in the facts and circumstances of the case by - passing the impugned Order without following the judicial Precedence on this matter. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S PRESTIGE ESTATE PROJECTS LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and

ITA 850/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Sibichan K Mathew, CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 24

income under the head “ Profits and gains of business or profession”. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld.CIT(A), who after considering the assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2006-07, upheld the disallowance

PRESTIGE ESTATE PROJECTS LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and

ITA 845/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Sibichan K Mathew, CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 24

income under the head “ Profits and gains of business or profession”. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld.CIT(A), who after considering the assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2006-07, upheld the disallowance

INFOSYS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is also allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1531/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Padam Chand Khincha – CAFor Respondent: Smt Srinandini Das – CIT - DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

disallowance of deduction under section 10AA: 2.1. The learned Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department and the CIT(A) have erred in reducing the following incomes from profits of the business

INFOSYS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is also allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1532/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Padam Chand Khincha – CAFor Respondent: Smt Srinandini Das – CIT - DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

disallowance of deduction under section 10AA: 2.1. The learned Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department and the CIT(A) have erred in reducing the following incomes from profits of the business