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.

24 results for “disallowance”+ Section 80A(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai71Cochin43Delhi37Ahmedabad28Hyderabad26Visakhapatnam24Bangalore24Pune24Chennai23Jaipur18Rajkot13Kolkata10Panaji8Nagpur8Amritsar7Lucknow7Guwahati5SC2Jabalpur2Dehradun1Indore1Chandigarh1Surat1

Key Topics

Section 10A39Section 80P32Deduction22Addition to Income22Section 8015Section 80A(5)14Section 4014Section 80P(2)(a)13Section 80J12Disallowance

M/S. TATA ELXSI LIMITED., ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 927/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Kincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 10ASection 30Section 80ASection 80H

80A would clearly signify that such a deduction has to be of gross profits and gains, i.e., before computing the income as specified in Sections 30 to 43D of the Act." 106. Thus, it has been urged by the assessee by way of the additional ground that the ld. CIT(A), Mumbai erred in allowing the deduction in respect

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

12
Section 139(1)11
Exemption6

TATA ELXSI LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER INCOMER TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1152/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Tata Elxsi Ltd., The Deputy 126, Itpb Road, Commissioner Hoody, Of Income Tax, Whitefield, Circle – 7(1)(1), Bangalore – 560 048. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aaact7872Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT DR
Section 10ASection 10A(9)Section 250

1. General Ground 1.1 The order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as CIT(A), NFAC) under Page 2 of 39 section 250 of the Act to the extent prejudicial to the appellant is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2. Grounds relating to allocation of common

M/S. TATA ELXSI LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

ITA 975/BANG/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jan 2024AY 2020-2021
Section 10ASection 30Section 80ASection 80HSection 80I

80A would clearly signify that such a\ndeduction has to be of gross profits and gains, i.e., before computing the income as\nspecified in Sections 30 to 43D of the Act.\n106. Thus, it has been urged by the assessee by way of the additional ground that the ld.\nCIT(A), Mumbai erred in allowing the deduction in respect

SRI. KALABHAIRAWESHWARA MULTI-PURPOSE CO-OP SOCIETY LTD., ,CHIKKAMAGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , CHIKKAMAGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1344/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathi. Sr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sri Kalabhairaveshwara Multi-Purpose Co- Vs. Ito, Operative Society Ltd., Ward Officer, K. M. Road,Chikmagalur District Office Ward – 1, S. O. 577 101, Karnataka. Chikmagaluru. Pan : Aapas 3058 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Mahesh R. Uppin, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Neha Sahay, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 16.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Mahesh R. Uppin, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80P

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s. 80P of the Act by virtue of provision contained in Sec. 80AC of the Act was left out to be pleaded in the grounds of appeal before the First Appellate Authority due to oversight. The belated filing of ITR will not disentitle the appellant from claiming the benefit u/s. 80P of the Act as held

PRIMARY AGRICULTURE COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, ADARAKATTI,LAKSHMESHWAR TALUK GADAG DISTRICT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, GADAG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 279/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Hindi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept
Section 10ASection 10BSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 80A(5)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

80A. (1) In computing the total income of an assessee, there shall be allowed from his gross total income, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this Chapter, the deductions specified in sections 80C to 83 [80U] ... (5) Where the assessee fails to make a claim in his return of income for any deduction under section

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee as well as by revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 809/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.735/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Sreenivas T. Bidari, D.R
Section 11Section 14ASection 194JSection 234BSection 40Section 80J

section 80JJAA being disallowed. 17.1. The Ld.AR submitted that copy of the Audit report under section 80JJAA, being Form No. 10DA was submitted to the Ld.AO vide submission dated 28.5.2014. The Ld.AO thereafter called upon assessee to justify the allowability of deduction under section 80JJAA. The assessee explained in detail as to why deduction under section 80JJAA should be allowed

M/S INFOSYS LTD ,BANGALOR E vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee as well as by revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 735/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.735/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Sreenivas T. Bidari, D.R
Section 11Section 14ASection 194JSection 234BSection 40Section 80J

section 80JJAA being disallowed. 17.1. The Ld.AR submitted that copy of the Audit report under section 80JJAA, being Form No. 10DA was submitted to the Ld.AO vide submission dated 28.5.2014. The Ld.AO thereafter called upon assessee to justify the allowability of deduction under section 80JJAA. The assessee explained in detail as to why deduction under section 80JJAA should be allowed

BELVE VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LIMITED ,UDUPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, UDUPI

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

ITA 817/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh R Uppin, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 263Section 56Section 80A(5)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

80A(5) of the Act provides that the no deduction under section 80P of the Act shall be allowed in case where the assessee fails to claim the same in the return of income. In this case, the assessee has not filed return of income with the prescribed time allowed under section 139(1), 139(4) or within the time

BELVE VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LIMITED,UDUPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, UDUPI

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

ITA 818/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh R Uppin, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 263Section 56Section 80A(5)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

80A(5) of the Act provides that the no deduction under section 80P of the Act shall be allowed in case where the assessee fails to claim the same in the return of income. In this case, the assessee has not filed return of income with the prescribed time allowed under section 139(1), 139(4) or within the time

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

80A(1) stipulates that in computing the total income of an assessee, there shall be allowed from his gross total income, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of the Chapter, the deductions specified in Sections 80C to 80U. Section 80B(5) defines for the purposes of Chapter VIA "gross total income" to mean the total income computed

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

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

ITA 1530/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Sri Padam Chand Khincha – CAFor Respondent: Smt Srinandini Das – CIT - DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 254Section 80A(5)

disallowance of deduction under section 10AA: 2.1. The learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Bengaluru ('AO') and the CIT(A) have erred in not allowing the following incomes from profits of the business of SEZ units in computing deduction under section 10AA for the reason that the said claim had been raised for the first time

KALIA SERVICE CO-OP BANK,BELHANGADY vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PUTTUR

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

ITA 743/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 80Section 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80P

80A(5), the claim for deduction under section 80P could be made by an assessee in a return filed within the time prescribed for filing such returns under any of the above provisions. The amendment to Section 80AC with effect from 01-04-2018, however, mandated that for an assessee to get a deduction under section

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

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

ITA 962/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri P.C Kincha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri A Sreenivasa Rao, CIT (DR)
Section 1Section 10ASection 2Section 234BSection 250Section 32A

disallowed by the learned CIT(A) by holding that the assessee has not claimed deduction under section 10AA of the Act on these items in the return of income. Therefore in pursuance to the provision section 80A(5) of the Act, no deduction under section 10AA of the Act, be allowed in absence of claim made in the return

ROBERT BOSCH ENGINEERING AND BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LARGE TAX PAYERS UNIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 593/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Sridhar E, CIT (DR)For Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 115Section 115JSection 237Section 80J

80A(4) of the Act, the ld. CIT(A) opined that no further deduction under Section 80JJAA could be allowed for units whose profits were already claimed as exempt under Sections 10A or 10AA of the Act. Consequently, the ld. CIT(A) disallowed the claim for these units. 8.5 The ld. CIT(A) further disallowed the deduction under Section 80JJAA

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2, LTU, BENGALURU vs. M/S. ROBERT BOSCH ENGINEERING AND BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 446/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Sridhar E, CIT (DR)For Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 115Section 115JSection 237Section 80J

80A(4) of the Act, the ld. CIT(A) opined that no further deduction under Section 80JJAA could be allowed for units whose profits were already claimed as exempt under Sections 10A or 10AA of the Act. Consequently, the ld. CIT(A) disallowed the claim for these units. 8.5 The ld. CIT(A) further disallowed the deduction under Section 80JJAA

SRITHERUMALLESHWARA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ,CHITRADURGA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , CHITRADURGA

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

ITA 187/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144ASection 69ASection 80P(2)(a)

disallowing the cash deposits during the demonetization period. The AO did not ask further details. If he had any doubt, he should have issued notice further. The CIT(Appeals) has relied on the order in ITA No.329/Bang/2023 dated 14.8.2023 and confirmed the addition. He further submitted that deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) should also be given to the assessee

SHRI. DUNICHAND KHITRI RAJA,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 315/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2019-20 Shri. Dunichand Khitri Raja, The Assistant Commissioner Of #304, 16Th Cross, Sadashivnagar, Income Tax, Bengaluru – 560 080. Vs. Cpc, Pan : Addpr 6538 G Bengaluru. Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Ankit, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, Addl. Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 07.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.06.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Ankit, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80Section 80A(5)Section 80I

1) in accordance with the provisions of section 80A(5). d) Without prejudice, the belated filing of the form, if any, is merely a procedural error and cannot be a ground to bar the claim of deduction under section 80- IA of the Act; 2.3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law', the disallowance

WIPRO LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 370/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Huilgol, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihallli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80G

80A; IT(TP)A No.370/Bang/2021 Page 33 of 110 (iii) any transfer of goods or services referred to in sub-section (8) of section 80-IA; (iv) any business transacted between the assessee and other person as referred to in sub-section (10) of section 80-IA; (v) any transaction, referred to in any other section under Chapter

M/S BHUWALKA STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1)(4), BANGALORE

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

ITA 3433/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. T. Srinivasa, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sunil Kumar Singh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

disallowance of expenses etc. as required under provisions of sections 40A, 80-IA, 10AA, 80A, sections where reference is made to section 80-IA, or to transactions as may be prescribed by the Board, if aggregate amount of all such domestic transactions exceeds Rupees 5 crore in a year. It is further proposed to amend the meaning of related persons

M/S. BHUWALKA STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1599/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. T. Srinivasa, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sunil Kumar Singh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

disallowance of expenses etc. as required under provisions of sections 40A, 80-IA, 10AA, 80A, sections where reference is made to section 80-IA, or to transactions as may be prescribed by the Board, if aggregate amount of all such domestic transactions exceeds Rupees 5 crore in a year. It is further proposed to amend the meaning of related persons