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.

3 results for “disallowance”+ Section 234Eclear

Sorted by relevance

Indore108 Raipur8 Mumbai6 Jaipur4 Chennai4 Delhi3 Bangalore3 Kolkata2 Lucknow2 Ahmedabad1 Cochin1 Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 683 Section 2502 Section 144(3)2 Section 92C2

R ARUNACHALAM P C P P LTD,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1)(2), BENGALURU

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

ITA 717/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Ms. Manasa Ananthan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 40ASection 40aSection 68

disallowance under section 40a(i) is not attracted. 4. That consequential relief be granted for levy of interest under sections 234A and 234E

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 202/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No.202/Bang/2021 Assessment Year :2015-16 M/S. Nike India Pvt.Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Ground & First Floor, Circle – 3(1)(1), Olympia Building, No.66/1, Bagmane Tech Bengaluru. Park, C. V. Raman Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 093. Pan : Aabcn 9612 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Susan Dolores George, Cit(Osd)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 21.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan:

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Susan Dolores George, CIT(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 144(3)Section 92C

disallowed as capital expenditure by the Revenue authorities. The Tribunal, after considering the various decisions cited on behalf of the assessee, finally concluded as follows: “Coming to question No.2, we find that in a catena of decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the assessee (cited supra), it has been held that when any expenditure is incurred

CORP ATTIRE,BENGALURU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 202/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No.202/Bang/2021 Assessment Year :2015-16 M/S. Nike India Pvt.Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Ground & First Floor, Circle – 3(1)(1), Olympia Building, No.66/1, Bagmane Tech Bengaluru. Park, C. V. Raman Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 093. Pan : Aabcn 9612 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Susan Dolores George, Cit(Osd)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 21.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan:

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Susan Dolores George, CIT(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 144(3)Section 92C

disallowed as capital expenditure by the Revenue authorities. The Tribunal, after considering the various decisions cited on behalf of the assessee, finally concluded as follows: “Coming to question No.2, we find that in a catena of decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the assessee (cited supra), it has been held that when any expenditure is incurred