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.

620 results for “disallowance”+ Undisclosed Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,591Delhi2,326Chennai935Kolkata913Bangalore620Jaipur540Ahmedabad310Hyderabad300Indore183Chandigarh167Rajkot145Pune136Surat134Cochin102Amritsar99Nagpur96Raipur92Cuttack65Guwahati56Allahabad53Lucknow53Calcutta42Visakhapatnam41Patna40Karnataka36Jodhpur33Ranchi33Agra28Telangana17Dehradun10Varanasi9Kerala7Panaji6SC6Jabalpur5Orissa3Gauhati2Punjab & Haryana2H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 153A97Addition to Income88Section 13274Section 153C69Section 143(3)57Disallowance44Section 6831Section 133A27Section 14827Undisclosed Income

S.R. RAVISHANKAR,CHAMARAJPET, BANGALORE vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1085/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri.Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2015-16 Shri. S. R. Ravishankar, Vs. Acit, No.80, 1St Main Road, Central Circle – 2(4), Chamarajpet, Bengaluru- 560018. Bangalore. Pan : Aclpr 5363 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Sandeep Chalapathy, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Subramanian S, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271A

undisclosed income” under Explanation (c) to Section 271AAB and the provisions of section 271AAB are not applicable. 1.5. In support of the above proposition, we rely on the judgement held by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” Jaipur in the case of Shri Paras Mal Jain V. The DCIT Central Circle-1, Jaipur [ITA No. 353/JP/2022] (Page

Showing 1–20 of 620 · Page 1 of 31

...
25
Section 13123
Survey u/s 133A20

M/S. SPR SPIRITS PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SPR GROUP HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED),BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 127/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 132Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40A(3)

disallowance of expenses aggregating to Rs.16,74,23,150/-. 3. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in treating the transactions with M/s. Vinayaka Fruit Mandi and M/s. Srinivasa Bottle Traders as bogus. 4. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) committed an error in upholding the additions, relying on the statements of Mr.Janardhan and Mr. Suresh

M/S SPR SPIRITS PVT. LTD.,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1 (3), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1658/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 132Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40A(3)

disallowance of expenses aggregating to Rs.16,74,23,150/-. 3. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in treating the transactions with M/s. Vinayaka Fruit Mandi and M/s. Srinivasa Bottle Traders as bogus. 4. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) committed an error in upholding the additions, relying on the statements of Mr.Janardhan and Mr. Suresh

M/S SPR SPIRITS PVT.LTD. ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (3) , BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1659/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 132Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40A(3)

disallowance of expenses aggregating to Rs.16,74,23,150/-. 3. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in treating the transactions with M/s. Vinayaka Fruit Mandi and M/s. Srinivasa Bottle Traders as bogus. 4. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) committed an error in upholding the additions, relying on the statements of Mr.Janardhan and Mr. Suresh

M/S SPR SPIRITS PVT. LTD.,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (3) , BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1661/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 132Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40A(3)

disallowance of expenses aggregating to Rs.16,74,23,150/-. 3. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in treating the transactions with M/s. Vinayaka Fruit Mandi and M/s. Srinivasa Bottle Traders as bogus. 4. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) committed an error in upholding the additions, relying on the statements of Mr.Janardhan and Mr. Suresh

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE vs. SHRI. T. NADAKRISHNA, BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 575/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 132Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40A(3)

disallowance of expenses aggregating to Rs.16,74,23,150/-. 3. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in treating the transactions with M/s. Vinayaka Fruit Mandi and M/s. Srinivasa Bottle Traders as bogus. 4. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) committed an error in upholding the additions, relying on the statements of Mr.Janardhan and Mr. Suresh

M/S SPR SPIRITS PVT. LTD.,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (3) , BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1660/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 132Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40A(3)

disallowance of expenses aggregating to Rs.16,74,23,150/-. 3. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in treating the transactions with M/s. Vinayaka Fruit Mandi and M/s. Srinivasa Bottle Traders as bogus. 4. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) committed an error in upholding the additions, relying on the statements of Mr.Janardhan and Mr. Suresh

M/S. S. RAMASHANDRA SETTY & SONS,HASSAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1156/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

undisclosed income by merely arithmetically totaling various figures jotted down on such document. 13.19 The seized material which is placed on record shows certain receipt entries and it is very strange to believe that the assessee has authorised any person to write it as it does not contain any attestation from the assessee side being not having any name

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 HASSAN, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONGS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1164/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

undisclosed income by merely arithmetically totaling various figures jotted down on such document. 13.19 The seized material which is placed on record shows certain receipt entries and it is very strange to believe that the assessee has authorised any person to write it as it does not contain any attestation from the assessee side being not having any name

INCOME TAX OFFICER W 1, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1166/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

undisclosed income by merely arithmetically totaling various figures jotted down on such document. 13.19 The seized material which is placed on record shows certain receipt entries and it is very strange to believe that the assessee has authorised any person to write it as it does not contain any attestation from the assessee side being not having any name

INCOME TAX OFFICER, W-1, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY & SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1163/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

undisclosed income by merely arithmetically totaling various figures jotted down on such document. 13.19 The seized material which is placed on record shows certain receipt entries and it is very strange to believe that the assessee has authorised any person to write it as it does not contain any attestation from the assessee side being not having any name

INCOME TAX OFFICER, W-1, VIJAYANAGAR vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1165/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

undisclosed income by merely arithmetically totaling various figures jotted down on such document. 13.19 The seized material which is placed on record shows certain receipt entries and it is very strange to believe that the assessee has authorised any person to write it as it does not contain any attestation from the assessee side being not having any name

MR. YUNUS ZIA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 126/BANG/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Mar 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri A. K. Garodia

For Appellant: Shri. S. Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 154

undisclosed income in the present case, this judgment is not applicable in the present case. 9. Now we take note of various judgments of various High Courts. The first such judgment we consider is of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of PCIT vs. Saumya Construction (P) Ltd. (Supra). Paras 18 to 20 of this judgment

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1213/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

undisclosed income is on the revenue. That burden cannot be said to be discharged by merely referring to the statement given by the assessee to the third party in connection with the transaction which was not directly related to the assessment. It is important to note that the Hon'ble High court held that a statement made by an assessee

SHRI. JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1212/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

undisclosed income is on the revenue. That burden cannot be said to be discharged by merely referring to the statement given by the assessee to the third party in connection with the transaction which was not directly related to the assessment. It is important to note that the Hon'ble High court held that a statement made by an assessee

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1215/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

undisclosed income is on the revenue. That burden cannot be said to be discharged by merely referring to the statement given by the assessee to the third party in connection with the transaction which was not directly related to the assessment. It is important to note that the Hon'ble High court held that a statement made by an assessee

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1211/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

undisclosed income is on the revenue. That burden cannot be said to be discharged by merely referring to the statement given by the assessee to the third party in connection with the transaction which was not directly related to the assessment. It is important to note that the Hon'ble High court held that a statement made by an assessee

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1214/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

undisclosed income is on the revenue. That burden cannot be said to be discharged by merely referring to the statement given by the assessee to the third party in connection with the transaction which was not directly related to the assessment. It is important to note that the Hon'ble High court held that a statement made by an assessee

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1216/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

undisclosed income is on the revenue. That burden cannot be said to be discharged by merely referring to the statement given by the assessee to the third party in connection with the transaction which was not directly related to the assessment. It is important to note that the Hon'ble High court held that a statement made by an assessee

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1217/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

undisclosed income is on the revenue. That burden cannot be said to be discharged by merely referring to the statement given by the assessee to the third party in connection with the transaction which was not directly related to the assessment. It is important to note that the Hon'ble High court held that a statement made by an assessee