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.

38 results for “disallowance”+ Section 80Jclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai54Delhi42Bangalore38Surat18Chennai16Ahmedabad12Indore12Pune11Rajkot10Raipur8Jaipur7Jodhpur5SC3Kolkata2Amritsar1Lucknow1Chandigarh1Nagpur1

Key Topics

Section 80P(2)(a)57Section 80P55Deduction28Section 80P(2)(d)22Section 143(3)21Section 26320Section 8017Section 10A17Section 5615Disallowance

THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICE, WARD-5(2)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly\nallowed as indicated herinabove

ITA 1052/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2024AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri K. Sheshadri, CA &For Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT – DR
Section 80PSection 80P(4)

disallowance made u/s.\n80P(2)(d) by the authorities below, the word 'attributable' used in\nthe said Section is of great importance. Hon'ble Supreme Court\nconsidered the meaning of the word 'attributable' as supposed to\nderive from its use in various other provisions of the statute, in\nthe case of Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co.\nLtd

THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1) , BANGALORE

ITA 1055/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 38 · Page 1 of 2

15
Addition to Income10
Exemption8
ITAT Bangalore
29 Apr 2024
AY 2014-15
For Appellant: \nShri Bharadwaj SheshadriFor Respondent: \nShri D.K. Mishra, CIT – DR
Section 80PSection 80P(4)

disallowance made u/s.\n80P(2)(d) by the authorities below, the word 'attributable' used in\nthe said Section is of great importance. Hon'ble Supreme Court\nconsidered the meaning of the word 'attributable' as supposed to\nderive from its use in various other provisions of the statute, in\nthe case of Cambay\nElectric\nSupply Industrial Co.\nLtd

THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly\nallowed as indicated herinabove

ITA 1060/BANG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2024AY 2020-21
For Appellant: \nShri K. Sheshadri, CA &For Respondent: \nShri D.K. Mishra, CIT – DR
Section 80PSection 80P(4)

disallowance made u/s.\n80P(2)(d) by the authorities below, the word 'attributable' used in\nthe said Section is of great importance. Hon'ble Supreme Court\nconsidered the meaning of the word 'attributable' as supposed to\nderive from its use in various other provisions of the statute, in\nthe case of Cambay\nElectric\nSupply Industrial Co.\nLtd

THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK,BENGALURU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly\nallowed as indicated herinabove

ITA 1053/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2024AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Bharadwaj SheshadriFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT – DR
Section 80PSection 80P(4)

disallowance made u/s.\n80P(2)(d) by the authorities below, the word 'attributable' used in\nthe said Section is of great importance. Hon'ble Supreme Court\nconsidered the meaning of the word 'attributable' as supposed to\nderive from its use in various other provisions of the statute, in\nthe case of Cambay\nElectric\nSupply Industrial Co.\nLtd

THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 5(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly\nallowed as indicated herinabove

ITA 1057/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2024AY 2016-17
For Appellant: \nShri K. Sheshadri, CA &For Respondent: \nShri D.K. Mishra, CIT – DR
Section 80PSection 80P(4)

disallowance made u/s.\n80P(2)(d) by the authorities below, the word 'attributable' used in\nthe said Section is of great importance. Hon'ble Supreme Court\nconsidered the meaning of the word 'attributable' as supposed to\nderive from its use in various other provisions of the statute, in\nthe case of Cambay\nElectric\nSupply Industrial Co.\nLtd

ARATHI VINAY PATIL ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(3)(4), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 604/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 44ASection 80Section 801ASection 80I

80J(6A) which are similar to the provisions of Section 80IA(7), we feel that the Tribunal has arrived at the correct conclusion that the requirement of filing the audit report along with the return is not mandatory but directory and that if the audit report is filed at any time before the framing of the assessment, the requirement

THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly\nallowed as indicated herinabove

ITA 1059/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2024AY 2018-19
For Appellant: \nShri K. Sheshadri, CA &For Respondent: \nShri D.K. Mishra, CIT – DR
Section 80PSection 80P(4)

disallowance made u/s.\n80P(2)(d) by the authorities below, the word 'attributable' used in\nthe said Section is of great importance. Hon'ble Supreme Court\nconsidered the meaning of the word 'attributable' as supposed to\nderive from its use in various other provisions of the statute, in\nthe case of Cambay\nElectric\nSupply Industrial Co.\nLtd

THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly\nallowed as indicated herinabove

ITA 1058/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nShri K. Sheshadri, CA &For Respondent: \nShri D.K. Mishra, CIT – DR
Section 80PSection 80P(4)

disallowance made u/s.\n80P(2)(d) by the authorities below, the word 'attributable' used in\nthe said Section is of great importance. Hon'ble Supreme Court\nconsidered the meaning of the word 'attributable' as supposed to\nderive from its use in various other provisions of the statute, in\nthe case of Cambay\nElectric\nSupply Industrial Co.\nLtd

THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK,BENGALURU vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly\nallowed as indicated herinabove

ITA 1054/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2024AY 2013-14
Section 80PSection 80P(4)

disallowance made u/s.\n80P(2)(d) by the authorities below, the word 'attributable' used in\nthe said Section is of great importance. Hon'ble Supreme Court\nconsidered the meaning of the word 'attributable' as supposed to\nderive from its use in various other provisions of the statute, in\nthe case of Cambay\nElectric\nSupply Industrial Co.\nLtd

THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly\nallowed as indicated herinabove

ITA 1056/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nShri K. Sheshadri, CA &For Respondent: \nShri D.K. Mishra, CIT – DR
Section 80PSection 80P(4)

disallowance made u/s.\n80P(2)(d) by the authorities below, the word 'attributable' used in\nthe said Section is of great importance. Hon'ble Supreme Court\nconsidered the meaning of the word 'attributable' as supposed to\nderive from its use in various other provisions of the statute, in\nthe case of Cambay\nElectric\nSupply Industrial Co.\nLtd

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, HOSPET vs. GAYATRI PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA, HOSPET, HOSPET

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

ITA 1078/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowance u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act as the interest income has been earned from investment in FDs with Co-operative banks/other banks. Further, the ld. DR relied on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Division Bench in the case of Pr. CIT Hubballi Vs. Totgar's Co-operative Sale Society Ltd, Sirsi

IBM GLOBAL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3464/BANG/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2000-2001

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 10A(2)Section 10A(2)(ia)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

disallowance made in the assessment order was denying exemption claimed u/s. 10A of the act on the ground that, the export turnover brought into India does not amount to 75 percent of the total turnover of the STP unit. It was submitted by the assessee that, it treated export credits of the bank account maintained

SHRI SHIVAJI MAHARAJ CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD,BIJAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 AND TPS, VIJAYPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands\nallowed for statistical purposes

ITA 976/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Aug 2024AY 2015-16
Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowance made u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) by the\nLd.CIT(A)/NFAC, the word 'attributable' used in the said Section\nis of great importance. Hon'ble Supreme Court considered the\nmeaning of the word 'attributable' as supposed to derive from its\nuse in various other provisions of the statute, in the case\nof Cambay Electric Supply Industrial

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. M/S. BANGALORE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result both the appeals of the Revenue as well as\nCos of the Assessee for the Asst

ITA 2347/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowed the deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. It is\nsubmitted that the investments were made out of surplus funds\nand relied on the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the\ndecision of PCIT v. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society 392 ITR 74\nwherein it was held that the interest earned on deposits

JAMMANAHALLY PRATHAMIKA KRISHI PATTINA SAHAKARA SANGHA,BALLUPET vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, HASSAN

In the result ITA No. 192/Bangalore/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 341/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 80

disallowance for one reason that the assessee did not appear before the learned CIT A despite given many opportunities for the hearing, holding as under :- "DECISION: As per the income and expenditure statement submitted, the assesse has declared income on deposits of Rs. 36,58,271/-. Hence, it is evident that the assesse is having interest income, which

JAMMANAHALLY PRATHAMIKA KRISHI PATTINA SAHAKARA SANGHA,SAKLESHPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2, HASSAN

In the result ITA No. 192/Bangalore/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 192/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 80

disallowance for one reason that the assessee did not appear before the learned CIT A despite given many opportunities for the hearing, holding as under :- "DECISION: As per the income and expenditure statement submitted, the assesse has declared income on deposits of Rs. 36,58,271/-. Hence, it is evident that the assesse is having interest income, which

SHREE JAGADGURU MOUNESHWAR PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT KERUR,BAGALKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BAGALKOT

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1623/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 56Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowed. Assessment order u/s 143(3) read with section 144B of the Income tax Act was passed on 20/09/2022. 6. The assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT – A unsuccessfully wherein after considering the submissions of the assessee he relying on the decision of the honourable Karnataka High Court in case of principal Commissioner of income tax versus Totgars

KUMBRA VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARY BANK LIMITED,PUTTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD-1, , PUTTUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly\nallowed for statistical purposes

ITA 513/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Srinath S, JCIT –DR
Section 143(2)Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowance made u/s.\n80P(2)(d) by the authorities below, the word 'attributable' used in\nthe said Section is of great importance. Hon'ble Supreme Court\nconsidered the meaning of the word 'attributable' as supposed to\nderive from its use in various other provisions of the statute, in\nthe case of Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co.\nLtd

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, UDUPI, UUPI vs. KAMBADAKONE RYTARA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LTD, UDUPI

ITA 1930/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
Section 194A(3)(v)Section 250Section 28Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowance. Therefore, we allow this ground of\ncross objection of the assessee.\n10.4.8 Accordingly, we set-aside the order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC\non this issue and remit this issue to the file of AO to recompute the\ncorrect business profit & Gross Total Income after taking into\nconsideration the interest Income accrued to the assessee &\nthereafter determine the correct

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, UDUPI vs. KAMBADAKONE RYTARA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LTD, UPPUNDA

ITA 1929/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Sri Mahesh R Uppin, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 194A(3)(v)Section 250Section 28Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowance. Therefore, we allow this ground of\ncross objection of the assessee.\n10.4.8\nAccordingly, we set-aside the order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC\non this issue and remit this issue to the file of AO to recompute the\ncorrect business profit & Gross Total Income after taking into\nconsideration the interest Income accrued to the assessee &\nthereafter determine the correct