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.

8 results for “disallowance”+ Section 80Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai48Delhi16Kolkata11Chandigarh10Jaipur9Bangalore8Ahmedabad7Hyderabad7Chennai4Calcutta4Rajkot3Indore3Visakhapatnam2Nagpur2Agra2Pune2Jodhpur1Karnataka1Raipur1Panaji1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 14A13Addition to Income7Section 143(3)6Disallowance6Section 143(1)5Section 1545Section 80C4Section 904Section 143(1)(a)3

TOYOTA BOSHOKU AUTOMOTIVE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BIDADI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT OR THE DCIT, CIRCLE - 7(1)(1), KORAMANGALA

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

ITA 1539/BANG/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 May 2025

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri K.R Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)
Section 234ASection 270A

section include: 1. Mathematical Errors - Correction of any arithmetical or clerical errors in the return. 2. Incorrect Claims - Disallowance of incorrect claims that are apparent from the information provided in the return. . IT(TP)A No.1539/Bang/2024 Page 29 of 37 3. Disallowance of Losses - If carried-forward losses or deductions are claimed without filing the required supporting documents or returns

BACHIRA UTHAIAH POOVAIAH,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(4), BENGALURU

Section 139(1)3
Deduction2
Rectification u/s 1542

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2410/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Years: 2018-19

For Appellant: Ms. Lakshmi S. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80CSection 90

disallowance of the foreign tax credit of ₹ 2,34,743/- only. Page 2 of 14 3. The brief facts are that the appellant, a salaried individual employed with Evry India Pvt. Ltd. The assessee in the original returned filed dated 29-08-2018 declared gross income from the salary at ₹ 3,85,964/- and after claiming deduction under section

SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC IT BUSINESS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, CIRCLE-2, BANGALORE

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

ITA 185/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.185/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 92D

Section 14A are not applicable in the instant case. 13.1 The argument of the Ld. A.R. is that assessee has no exempted income as such there cannot be any disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. 13.2 The Ld. D.R. submitted that even though there is no expenditure has been incurred, AO has to presume that there was incurring of expenditure

M/S MANIPAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,UDUPI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, UDUPI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 325/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

80D(2) cannot be appreciated. 7.2 In respect of the disallowance being deleted by the ld.CIT(A) under Rule 8D(2)(ii), the Ld.DR did not arise any arguments, how so ever, in respect of 3rd limb of Rule 8D(2), he submitted that, the assessee had intention of earning profits from the investments made and earned dividend income from

ARIBA TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

ITA 1587/BANG/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Mar 2025

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Mr. Aliasgar Rampurawala, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Nandini Das, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

section include: 1. Mathematical Errors – Correction of any arithmetical or clerical errors in the return. 2. Incorrect Claims – Disallowance of incorrect claims that are apparent from the information provided in the return. 3. Disallowance of Losses – If carried-forward losses or deductions are claimed without filing the required supporting documents or returns in previous years. 4. Deduction Disallowance

BIOPLUS LIFE SCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1935/BANG/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Mar 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Helga Sequeria, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)
Section 14ASection 35D

disallowance under Rule 80D(2) is mandatory as per Income Tax Rule 1962. From the order of the lower authorities and as per our opinion, the Rule 8D is mandatory and it would be evident from plain reading of 14A(2) of the Act. Section

SRI. SANJAY RAMPRAKASH SAXENA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, , BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 176/BANG/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri. Sanjay Ramprakash Saxena, Dcit, G1, Smr Devmuk Cpc, Sy. No.97/104, 9Th Main, Vs. Bengaluru. Bannerghatta Road, Vijaya Bank Layout, Bengaluru – 560 076. Pan : Aozps 7209 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Bharath Shetty, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel. Date Of Hearing : 17.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.05.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Bharath Shetty, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 10Section 10(13)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 17(2)Section 250Section 80CSection 80D

80D, the net taxable income was shown as Rs.15,06,451/-. During the course of processing of return under section 143(1)(a) of the Act wherein disallowances

M/S KHODAY BREWERIES LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2487/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.R.Ramesh, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

80D of the Rules. 3.1 We have heard rival submissions on the issue. As pointed out on behalf of the assessee, the assessee has claimed that no exempt income has been earned during the year. Howver, the CIT(A) has sustained the disallowance to the extent of Rs. 17933/- as computed as per Rule