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.

17 results for “section 68”+ Section 801A(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai131Delhi91Ahmedabad67Hyderabad60Pune20Bangalore17Chennai14Jaipur13Kolkata13Cuttack10Surat8Rajkot7Nagpur5Jodhpur4Lucknow4Raipur4Visakhapatnam3Indore2Amritsar2

Key Topics

Section 14A50Section 80I22Addition to Income14Disallowance12Section 142(1)10TDS10Section 801A9Section 808Section 80H8Section 139(1)

GMR TAMBARAM TINDIVANAM EXPRESSWAYS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result that the revenue appeals are dismissed

ITA 545/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Sunil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 16

801A is to be allowed during current year if, allowed in earlier assessment years. In other words, principle of consistency needs to be followed. Reliance is placed on Bangalore ITAT decision in ITA No 1132 & 1133/Bang/2018. 11. The strengthening of the existing four lanes is required to be treated as a development of infrastructure activity in terms of various terms

MR. JITENDRA KUMAR NAHATA,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), CIRCLE-6(1)(1) REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

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

7
Deduction6
Section 1545
ITA 41/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Sunaina Bhatia, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Sankarganesh K, JCIT (DR)
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 801ASection 801BSection 80ASection 80I

801A(4) of Rs. 19,18,68,986/-, thus resulting in the income of Rs. 19,24,14,160/- (after rounding of). The appellant filed an application u/ s. 154 which was rejected and further a grievance petition was filed on 29.01.2018 in which it was stated to the appellant that the return has been filed after the due date

DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1) & TPS, MANGALURU vs. NEW MANGALORE PORT AUTHORITY, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue on this for the Assessment Years

ITA 485/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Priyanka Jain and Shri. Pankaj Soni, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. Kiran D, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 142(1)Section 14ASection 80I

68,72,56,631/- Disallowance of interest on reserve fund Ground No.5: 3,95,432/- Mismatch of TDS 3. 725/Bang/2025 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- Ground Nos.1 and 2: 23,14,000/- 2017-18 25/1071843769(1) Disallowance of dated 03.01.2025 expenses under section 14A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) Ground Nos.3 and 4: 75,58,30,838/- Disallowance

DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1) & TPS, MANGALURU vs. NEW MANGALORE PORT AUTHORITY, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue on this for the Assessment Years

ITA 486/BANG/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Priyanka Jain and Shri. Pankaj Soni, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. Kiran D, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 142(1)Section 14ASection 80I

68,72,56,631/- Disallowance of interest on reserve fund Ground No.5: 3,95,432/- Mismatch of TDS 3. 725/Bang/2025 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- Ground Nos.1 and 2: 23,14,000/- 2017-18 25/1071843769(1) Disallowance of dated 03.01.2025 expenses under section 14A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) Ground Nos.3 and 4: 75,58,30,838/- Disallowance

NEW MANGALORE PORT AUTHORITY,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1 & TPS, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue on this for the Assessment Years

ITA 723/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Priyanka Jain and Shri. Pankaj Soni, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. Kiran D, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 142(1)Section 14ASection 80I

68,72,56,631/- Disallowance of interest on reserve fund Ground No.5: 3,95,432/- Mismatch of TDS 3. 725/Bang/2025 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- Ground Nos.1 and 2: 23,14,000/- 2017-18 25/1071843769(1) Disallowance of dated 03.01.2025 expenses under section 14A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) Ground Nos.3 and 4: 75,58,30,838/- Disallowance

NEW MANGALORE PORT AUTHORITY,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1 & TPS, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue on this for the Assessment Years

ITA 727/BANG/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Priyanka Jain and Shri. Pankaj Soni, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. Kiran D, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 142(1)Section 14ASection 80I

68,72,56,631/- Disallowance of interest on reserve fund Ground No.5: 3,95,432/- Mismatch of TDS 3. 725/Bang/2025 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- Ground Nos.1 and 2: 23,14,000/- 2017-18 25/1071843769(1) Disallowance of dated 03.01.2025 expenses under section 14A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) Ground Nos.3 and 4: 75,58,30,838/- Disallowance

NEW MANGALORE PORT AUTHORITY,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1 & TPS, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue on this for the Assessment Years

ITA 725/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Priyanka Jain and Shri. Pankaj Soni, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. Kiran D, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 142(1)Section 14ASection 80I

68,72,56,631/- Disallowance of interest on reserve fund Ground No.5: 3,95,432/- Mismatch of TDS 3. 725/Bang/2025 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- Ground Nos.1 and 2: 23,14,000/- 2017-18 25/1071843769(1) Disallowance of dated 03.01.2025 expenses under section 14A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) Ground Nos.3 and 4: 75,58,30,838/- Disallowance

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), MANGALURU vs. NEW MANGALORE PORT AUTHORITY, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue on this for the Assessment Years

ITA 482/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Priyanka Jain and Shri. Pankaj Soni, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. Kiran D, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 142(1)Section 14ASection 80I

68,72,56,631/- Disallowance of interest on reserve fund Ground No.5: 3,95,432/- Mismatch of TDS 3. 725/Bang/2025 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- Ground Nos.1 and 2: 23,14,000/- 2017-18 25/1071843769(1) Disallowance of dated 03.01.2025 expenses under section 14A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) Ground Nos.3 and 4: 75,58,30,838/- Disallowance

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MANGALURU vs. NEW MANGALORE PORT AUTHORITY, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue on this for the Assessment Years

ITA 484/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Priyanka Jain and Shri. Pankaj Soni, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. Kiran D, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 142(1)Section 14ASection 80I

68,72,56,631/- Disallowance of interest on reserve fund Ground No.5: 3,95,432/- Mismatch of TDS 3. 725/Bang/2025 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- Ground Nos.1 and 2: 23,14,000/- 2017-18 25/1071843769(1) Disallowance of dated 03.01.2025 expenses under section 14A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) Ground Nos.3 and 4: 75,58,30,838/- Disallowance

NEW MANGALORE PORT AUTHORITY,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1 & TPS, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue on this for the Assessment Years

ITA 724/BANG/2025[201617]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Priyanka Jain and Shri. Pankaj Soni, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. Kiran D, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 142(1)Section 14ASection 80I

68,72,56,631/- Disallowance of interest on reserve fund Ground No.5: 3,95,432/- Mismatch of TDS 3. 725/Bang/2025 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- Ground Nos.1 and 2: 23,14,000/- 2017-18 25/1071843769(1) Disallowance of dated 03.01.2025 expenses under section 14A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) Ground Nos.3 and 4: 75,58,30,838/- Disallowance

NEW MANGALORE PORT AUTHORITY,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1 & TPS, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue on this for the Assessment Years

ITA 726/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Priyanka Jain and Shri. Pankaj Soni, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. Kiran D, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 142(1)Section 14ASection 80I

68,72,56,631/- Disallowance of interest on reserve fund Ground No.5: 3,95,432/- Mismatch of TDS 3. 725/Bang/2025 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- Ground Nos.1 and 2: 23,14,000/- 2017-18 25/1071843769(1) Disallowance of dated 03.01.2025 expenses under section 14A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) Ground Nos.3 and 4: 75,58,30,838/- Disallowance

DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1) & TPS, MANGALURU vs. NEW MANGALORE PORT AUTHORITY, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue on this for the Assessment Years

ITA 483/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Priyanka Jain and Shri. Pankaj Soni, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. Kiran D, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 142(1)Section 14ASection 80I

68,72,56,631/- Disallowance of interest on reserve fund Ground No.5: 3,95,432/- Mismatch of TDS 3. 725/Bang/2025 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- Ground Nos.1 and 2: 23,14,000/- 2017-18 25/1071843769(1) Disallowance of dated 03.01.2025 expenses under section 14A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) Ground Nos.3 and 4: 75,58,30,838/- Disallowance

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

801A of the Act as claimed, returned income be accepted and the interest levied be also deleted. 2. Facts of the case are that there was an intimation made u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) for AY 2019- 20 vide DIN No. CPC/1920/A3/197242969 dated 15.05.2020 raising a demand of Rs.11

M/S. CORETECH VENTURES (BANGALORE) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU-2, BANGALORE

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

ITA 746/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Coretech Ventures (Bangalore) Pvt. Ltd., The Principal Divyasree Chambers’ Commissioner Of Wing-A, O Shaugnessy Income Tax, Road, Bengaluru – 2, Langford Town, Vs. Bengaluru. Bangalore – 560 025. Pan: Aafcc2775E Appellant Respondent : Shri V. Chandrashekar, Assessee By Advocate : Shri V.S. Chakrapani, Cit- Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 01-06-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-07-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 30/03/2021 Passed By Ld.Pcit, Bangalore -2 U/S. 263 Of The Act For A.Y. 2016-17 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of Revision Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bengaluru -2, Bengaluru, Under Section 263 Of The Act Dated 30/03/2021, In So Far As It Is Against The Appellant Is Opposed To Law, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case.

For Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar
Section 143Section 263Section 80Section 801A

801A of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. The learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has further not appreciated and taken into consideration the net interest difference being the interest received and interest paid which resulted into a surplus of Rs.2,21,877/- i.e. [Rs.9,86,36,699- minus Rs.9,84,14,822/-] as forming

DCIT vs. M/S FIZA DEVELOPERS & INTERTRADE PVT. LTD.,,

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed statistical purposes

ITA 1026/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Dilip for K.V. Arivind, Standing CounselFor Respondent: Sri Narendra Sharma, A.R
Section 131Section 153ASection 68Section 80Section 80I

68 in respect of the unexplained credits in the name of Sri. Hyder Ali. Ground No.3 The learned CIT(A) erred in law and in fact in deleting the addition of Rs. 49,89,425/- made on account of unaccounted payments for purchase. Ground No.4 The learned CIT(A) erred in law and in fact in deleting the addition

M/S. ABB LIMITED(FORMERLY ASEA BROWN BOVERI LIMITED),BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 562/BANG/2007[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Mar 2021AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2001-02

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Dilip, Sr. Standing Counsel for the Dept
Section 80Section 80H

801A are net profits derived from the industrial undertaking and therefore they will have to be netted after adjusting all the expenses attributable to them in terms of the provisions contained in sections 28 to 43 of the I.T. Act. Therefore all expenses, whether they are direct or indirect or fixed, semi-fixed or variable, must be adjusted

ACIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S. ABB LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 755/BANG/2007[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Mar 2021AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2001-02

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Dilip, Sr. Standing Counsel for the Dept
Section 80Section 80H

801A are net profits derived from the industrial undertaking and therefore they will have to be netted after adjusting all the expenses attributable to them in terms of the provisions contained in sections 28 to 43 of the I.T. Act. Therefore all expenses, whether they are direct or indirect or fixed, semi-fixed or variable, must be adjusted