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.

310 results for “disallowance”+ Section 138clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai783Delhi736Bangalore310Chennai211Kolkata208Ahmedabad183Jaipur144Cochin83Hyderabad79Chandigarh65Raipur54Pune53Indore49Calcutta40Rajkot40Lucknow38Nagpur33Visakhapatnam33Surat28Amritsar26Karnataka16Cuttack13Allahabad13Jodhpur9Panaji7SC5Telangana5Agra3Guwahati3Dehradun3Patna3Orissa2Andhra Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1Jabalpur1Rajasthan1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Addition to Income69Disallowance51Section 143(1)43Section 143(3)42Section 14A41Section 36(1)(va)39Section 25034Deduction29Section 14828

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

disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D. The brief facts of the case are as under- During the year, the assessee earned exempt income being interest on tax free bonds and dividend from mutual funds amounting to Rs. 138

Showing 1–20 of 310 · Page 1 of 16

...
Section 43B26
Section 133A25
Transfer Pricing15

NADATHUR ESTATES P LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1434/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 14A(2)Section 234BSection 80G

138/- is required to be disallowed, As appellant has already disallowed PMS related expenses of Rs.59,58,386/- the disallowance u/s.14A rw R8D would be an amount of Rs.85,02,752/- AO is directed to restrict the disallowance u/s. 14A rw Rule 8D to this amount. These grounds are partly allowed.” 18. For the A.Y. 2010-11, the CIT(Appeals

KEDAMBADI MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE WOMEN SOCIETY LIMITED,KEDAMBADI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 PUTTUR, PUTTUR

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 280/BANG/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Krishna Kantila, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143Section 154Section 80Section 80ASection 80PSection 80p

disallowance of deduction claimed under sections 10AA, 80-IA, 80-IAB, 80-IB, 80-IC, 80- IDorsection 80-IE, if the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139; or (vi) addition of income appearing in Form 26AS or Form 16A or Form 16 which has not been included in computing the total

CHIKKAMUDNOOR MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, ,CHIKKAMUDNOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , PUTTUR

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 104/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Krishna Kantila, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143Section 154Section 80Section 80ASection 80PSection 80p

disallowance of deduction claimed under sections 10AA, 80-IA, 80-IAB, 80-IB, 80-IC, 80- IDorsection 80-IE, if the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139; or (vi) addition of income appearing in Form 26AS or Form 16A or Form 16 which has not been included in computing the total

M/S. UNITED SPIRITS LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10 are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1277/BANG/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Mar 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Abraham P George & Ita Nos.424 & 605(Bang)/2013 (Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Pradeep, CAFor Respondent: Shri C.H.Sundar Rao, CIT(DR)
Section 14A

section 14A cannot be invoked as has been held by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCI Ltd. (250 ITR 291). The learned Authorised Representative submitted that in this regard, the assessee places reliance on the following decisions of the various Tribunals. ITA No.1277/B/2010, 424M605,652&653/Bang/2013 M/s. United Spirits Ltd. Page

UNITED SPIRTIS LIMITED vs. ACIT,

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10 are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 424/BANG/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Mar 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Abraham P George & Ita Nos.424 & 605(Bang)/2013 (Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Pradeep, CAFor Respondent: Shri C.H.Sundar Rao, CIT(DR)
Section 14A

section 14A cannot be invoked as has been held by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCI Ltd. (250 ITR 291). The learned Authorised Representative submitted that in this regard, the assessee places reliance on the following decisions of the various Tribunals. ITA No.1277/B/2010, 424M605,652&653/Bang/2013 M/s. United Spirits Ltd. Page

DCIT vs. M/S UNITED SPIRITS LTD.,,

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10 are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 653/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Mar 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Abraham P George & Ita Nos.424 & 605(Bang)/2013 (Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Pradeep, CAFor Respondent: Shri C.H.Sundar Rao, CIT(DR)
Section 14A

section 14A cannot be invoked as has been held by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCI Ltd. (250 ITR 291). The learned Authorised Representative submitted that in this regard, the assessee places reliance on the following decisions of the various Tribunals. ITA No.1277/B/2010, 424M605,652&653/Bang/2013 M/s. United Spirits Ltd. Page

UNITED SPIRITS LTD. vs. ACIT,

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10 are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 605/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Mar 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Abraham P George & Ita Nos.424 & 605(Bang)/2013 (Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Pradeep, CAFor Respondent: Shri C.H.Sundar Rao, CIT(DR)
Section 14A

section 14A cannot be invoked as has been held by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCI Ltd. (250 ITR 291). The learned Authorised Representative submitted that in this regard, the assessee places reliance on the following decisions of the various Tribunals. ITA No.1277/B/2010, 424M605,652&653/Bang/2013 M/s. United Spirits Ltd. Page

DCIT vs. M/S UNITED SPIRITS LTD.,,

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10 are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 652/BANG/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Mar 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Abraham P George & Ita Nos.424 & 605(Bang)/2013 (Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Pradeep, CAFor Respondent: Shri C.H.Sundar Rao, CIT(DR)
Section 14A

section 14A cannot be invoked as has been held by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCI Ltd. (250 ITR 291). The learned Authorised Representative submitted that in this regard, the assessee places reliance on the following decisions of the various Tribunals. ITA No.1277/B/2010, 424M605,652&653/Bang/2013 M/s. United Spirits Ltd. Page

M/S. IBM INDIA PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 725/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate along with Ajay Roti, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K.V Arvind, Advocate
Section 10ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 92C

Section 92CC with the caption “Advance Pricing Agreement” provides through sub-section (1): `The Board, with the approval of the Central Government, may enter into an advance pricing agreement with any person, determining the arm's length price … in relation to an international transaction …’. Sub-section (2) gives the manner of determination of the ALP referred to in sub-section

SRI SOWRABHA MAHILA PATTINA SAHAKARA SANGHA ,TUMKUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TIPTUR

The appeals are dismissed, however

ITA 117/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Ms. Sahana T.H.M, Advocate
Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80P

disallowance which requires examination of facts, interpretation of provisions, or evaluation of the assessee's eligibility cannot be made under section 143 as such issues for outside the permissible scope of prima facie adjustments. He further submitted that where there are to views possible, it is not correct that adjustment can be made under section

AVNET INDIA PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12

ITA 196/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Deva Rathna Kumar, CIT (D.R)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92C

Section 92CA of the Act amounting to Rs.3,96,87,138 and disallowance under Section 14A of the Act of Rs.13

M/S KARNATAKA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 973/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Chetan R., Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14A

disallowance under section 14A cannot be made: (a) CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. reported in 319 ITR 204 (Punj. &Har.) (b) CIT v. Suzlon Energy Ltd. reported in 354 ITR 630 (Guj) (c) DIT(IT) v.BNP Paribas SA reported in 214 Taxman 548 (Born); (d) Yatish Trading Co. (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT reported

M/S INDUS-LEAGUE CLOTHING LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 210/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojarim/S. Indus League Clothing Limited, No.03, Puttappa Indl. Estate, Whitefield Road, Mahadevapura Post, Bangalore-560 048 ….Appellant Pan Aaaci 5392Q Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Bangalore. ……Respondent. Assessee By: Shri L. Bharath, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit (D.R)

For Appellant: Shri L. Bharath, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (D.R)
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

138, whereas the AO disallowed an amount of Rs Rs.3,36,28,000. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also following the ratios of the case laws discussed above, we are of the view that disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the exempt income. Hence, we direct the AO to restrict disallowance u/s 14A to the extent

KARNATAKA STATE INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(5), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms indicated above and the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1074/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri. Ramasubramaniam, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Manjeet Singh, Addl. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 1Section 115JSection 2Section 36Section 37Section 40ASection 9

disallowance made by the AO under section 14A r.w.r. 8D(ii) for the purpose of computing book profit under section 115JB of the Act. He submitted that in respect of this issue, the order of Special Bench of this Tribunal rendered in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd., in ITA No.502/Del/2012 dated 16.06.2017 is applicable

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE INDUSTRIAL & INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms indicated above and the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1334/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri. Ramasubramaniam, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Manjeet Singh, Addl. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 1Section 115JSection 2Section 36Section 37Section 40ASection 9

disallowance made by the AO under section 14A r.w.r. 8D(ii) for the purpose of computing book profit under section 115JB of the Act. He submitted that in respect of this issue, the order of Special Bench of this Tribunal rendered in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd., in ITA No.502/Del/2012 dated 16.06.2017 is applicable

ITEK PACKZ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2)(4), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 995/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Dec 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Gale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 244ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance is called for because of the per se late deposit of the employees’ share beyond the due date under the respective Act and section 43B is of no assistance. 4. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to take note of the relevant statutory provision in this regard. Section 2(24) provides that `income’ includes: `(x) any sum received

MASS FAB TECHNOLOGIES,BANGALORE vs. CIT(APPEALS), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1079/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Dec 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Gale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 244ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance is called for because of the per se late deposit of the employees’ share beyond the due date under the respective Act and section 43B is of no assistance. 4. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to take note of the relevant statutory provision in this regard. Section 2(24) provides that `income’ includes: `(x) any sum received

M/S. NANDI HOSPITALITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 296/BANG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Jun 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

138 taxmann.com 571 wherein held as under: _ In this case the assessee filed his return of income belatedly and return was processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act by observing that "in schedule Chapter VI-A, under Part-C deduction in respect of certain incomes, in SL.No. 2.1 deduction is claimed under Section 80P however return

M/S. NANDI HOSPITALITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 294/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

138 taxmann.com 571 wherein held as under: _ In this case the assessee filed his return of income belatedly and return was processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act by observing that "in schedule Chapter VI-A, under Part-C deduction in respect of certain incomes, in SL.No. 2.1 deduction is claimed under Section 80P however return