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.

1,993 results for “disallowance”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,701Delhi5,296Bangalore1,993Chennai1,758Kolkata1,441Ahmedabad1,347Pune918Jaipur853Hyderabad713Surat487Indore376Chandigarh373Karnataka360Raipur355Cochin343Cuttack284Visakhapatnam266Lucknow262Amritsar238Rajkot231Nagpur169Agra164Telangana113Allahabad111Jodhpur108Panaji100Calcutta97Guwahati97Patna71Dehradun59Jabalpur54Ranchi47SC36Kerala31Varanasi31Punjab & Haryana19Orissa11Rajasthan8Himachal Pradesh4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Andhra Pradesh1Gauhati1J&K1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Addition to Income74Section 143(3)65Disallowance52Section 153A44Section 25034Section 14A32Section 143(1)30Section 14829Natural Justice29Deduction

MOHAMMED IBRABIM MOHIDEEN ,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 486/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 153ASection 69B

natural justice because of which the assessee was adversely affected. It is to be borne in mind that the order of the Commissioner was based upon the statements given by the aforesaid two witnesses. Even when the assessee disputed the correctness of the statements and wanted to cross-examine, the Adjudicating Authority did not grant this opportunity to the assessee

MOHAMMED IBRAHIM MOHIDEEN,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Showing 1–20 of 1,993 · Page 1 of 100

...
28
Section 133A27
Section 80P(2)(a)22
ITA 466/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 153ASection 69B

natural justice because of which the assessee was adversely affected. It is to be borne in mind that the order of the Commissioner was based upon the statements given by the aforesaid two witnesses. Even when the assessee disputed the correctness of the statements and wanted to cross-examine, the Adjudicating Authority did not grant this opportunity to the assessee

MOHAMMED IBRAHIM MOHIDEEN,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 464/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 153ASection 69B

natural justice because of which the assessee was adversely affected. It is to be borne in mind that the order of the Commissioner was based upon the statements given by the aforesaid two witnesses. Even when the assessee disputed the correctness of the statements and wanted to cross-examine, the Adjudicating Authority did not grant this opportunity to the assessee

MOHAMMED IBRAHIM MOHIDEEN,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 463/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 153ASection 69B

natural justice because of which the assessee was adversely affected. It is to be borne in mind that the order of the Commissioner was based upon the statements given by the aforesaid two witnesses. Even when the assessee disputed the correctness of the statements and wanted to cross-examine, the Adjudicating Authority did not grant this opportunity to the assessee

BMM ISPAT LIMITED,HOSPET vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 779/BANG/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K.V.Arvind, Standing Counsel for Dept
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 234BSection 234DSection 68

justice. In this regard the assessee relies on the decision of Supreme Court in Suraj Mall Mohta & Co. vs A.V.Visvanatha Sastri & Anr - 26 ITR 1 (CLPB page 143). The perusal of the discussion by the AO does not bring out any fact that either there has been such purchases or any such payment. In fact the AO himself is confused

NIYAZ SEA FOODS ,MANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1019/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R
Section 132Section 133ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 2Section 41Section 41(1)

disallowance of Rs.1,94,18,130/- u/s 41(1) as cessation of liability and thereby raised tax demand of Rs.1,76,67,975/-. Aggrieved by this addition made, assessee went in appeals before ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same. Against this assessee once again is in appeal before us. ITA Nos.1018 & 1019/Bang/2024 Niyaz Sea Foods

MR.M RAMESH ,CHIKKABALLAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , CHIKKABALLAPUR

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 390/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth .G.S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 148Section 69

natural justice, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. 2. The appellant denies himself liable to be assessed on a total income of Rs.13,14,000/- as against Rs. 20,000/- returned by the appellant under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. a) The authorities below erred in disallowing

MR.M RAMESH ,CHIKKABALLAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , CHIKKABALLAPUR

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 394/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Mar 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth .G.S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 148Section 69

natural justice, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. 2. The appellant denies himself liable to be assessed on a total income of Rs.13,14,000/- as against Rs. 20,000/- returned by the appellant under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. a) The authorities below erred in disallowing

MR.M RAMESH ,CHIKKABALLAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, CHIKKABALLAPUR, CHIKKABALLAPUR

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 389/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth .G.S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 148Section 69

natural justice, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. 2. The appellant denies himself liable to be assessed on a total income of Rs.13,14,000/- as against Rs. 20,000/- returned by the appellant under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. a) The authorities below erred in disallowing

MR.M.RAMESH ,CHIKKABALLAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , CHIKKABALLAPUR

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 393/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth .G.S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 148Section 69

natural justice, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. 2. The appellant denies himself liable to be assessed on a total income of Rs.13,14,000/- as against Rs. 20,000/- returned by the appellant under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. a) The authorities below erred in disallowing

MR.M RAMESH ,CHIKKABALLAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, CHIKKABALLAPUR, CHIKKABALLAPUR

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 392/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth .G.S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 148Section 69

natural justice, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. 2. The appellant denies himself liable to be assessed on a total income of Rs.13,14,000/- as against Rs. 20,000/- returned by the appellant under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. a) The authorities below erred in disallowing

MR. M.RAMESH,CHIKKABALLAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, CHIKKABALLAPUR

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 391/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth .G.S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 148Section 69

natural justice, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. 2. The appellant denies himself liable to be assessed on a total income of Rs.13,14,000/- as against Rs. 20,000/- returned by the appellant under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. a) The authorities below erred in disallowing

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 839/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 987/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5

JOHN DEVELOPERS,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 845/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 847/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 838/BANG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 841/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 840/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

ITA 986/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sri T.M. Shivakumar

natural justice and the\norder of the lower authorities prevails.\n17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the\nopportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence,\nthis ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in\n assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed.\n18. Ground Nos.5