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.

92 results for “disallowance”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai15,587Delhi11,545Chennai5,224Bangalore4,969Kolkata4,478Pune2,003Ahmedabad1,908Hyderabad1,494Jaipur1,123Cochin809Indore731Chandigarh721Surat634Karnataka574Raipur499Rajkot435Nagpur423Visakhapatnam420Lucknow317Amritsar300Panaji281Cuttack261Agra173Telangana168Jodhpur152Ranchi133SC123Guwahati120Patna115Dehradun104Calcutta92Jabalpur82Kerala68Allahabad58Varanasi51Punjab & Haryana30Orissa11Rajasthan7Himachal Pradesh7A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN5J&K1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Tripura1Uttarakhand1Gauhati1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 260A76Deduction62Section 80I55Disallowance54Section 4036Addition to Income33Section 26330Section 14A26Section 143(3)24Section 43B

DEYS MEDICAL (U.P.) PRIVATE LIMITED vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 KOLKATA

ITAT/160/2024HC Calcutta18 Feb 2026

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ,HON'BLE JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR

Section 40

disallowed primarily because the appellant failed to deduct Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) at the prescribed rates, as mandated by law. 21. The Tribunal

AI CHAMPDANY INDUSTRIES LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX, CENTRAL - II KOLKATA , WEST BENGAL

In the result, we find that the order of the

ITA/32/2005HC Calcutta16 Sept 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 80H

Showing 1–20 of 92 · Page 1 of 5

20
Section 194C18
Depreciation12

deduction allowed under Section 80HHC and, subsequently, in passing the reassessment order and disallowing the assessee’s claim for deduction

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES PVT LTD

In the result, the appeals are dismissed and the substantial

ITAT/86/2024HC Calcutta25 Sept 2024

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 80I

disallowance of deduction claimed under Section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The facts which are necessary

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES PVT LTD

In the result, the appeals are dismissed and the substantial

ITAT/85/2024HC Calcutta25 Sept 2024

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 80I

disallowance of deduction claimed under Section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The facts which are necessary

MA/S SKYSCRAPER PROJECTS PVT LTD. vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(2), KOLKATA

ITAT/141/2025HC Calcutta28 Jul 2025

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

For Appellant: Mr. Anil Kumar Dugar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Advocate
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 43B

disallowance can be made. Similar issue arose for consideration in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Noble & Hewitt (I) (P.) Ltd., [2008] 166 taxmann.com 48 (Del.) wherein it was held that when the assessee has not even claimed any deduction

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOL-11,KOLKATA vs. ASHIANA AMAR DEVELOPERS

Accordingly the appeal fails and dismissed

ITAT/212/2018HC Calcutta26 Jul 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak Date : 26Th July, 2022 Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv… For The Appellant. Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv. Mr. Mrigank Kejriwal ….For Respondent. Ga/1/2018 The Court : We Have Heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, Learned Standing Counsel For The Appellant & Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala Learned Advocate Assisted By Mr. Mrigank Kejriwal, Learned Advocate For The Respondent/Assessee. There Is A Delay Of 118 Days In Filing The Appeal. We Have Perused The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Petition & Found That Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Not Being Able To Prefer The Appeal Within The Period

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 80I

deduction was claimed by the assessee in respect of the same project up to the stage which was concluded during the assessment year 2010-11. The assessing officer disallowed

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LARGE TAX PAYERS UNIT) KOLKATA vs. CENTURY PLYBOARDS (INDIA) LTD.

ITA/39/2021HC Calcutta15 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 14ASection 260ASection 80I

deduction was disallowed. The reasoning of the assessing officer in all these three years is that the assessee has not undertaken

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LARGE TAX PAYERS UNIT), KOLKATA vs. M/S. CENTURY PLYBOARDS (I) LTD

ITA/159/2018HC Calcutta15 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 14ASection 260ASection 80I

deduction was disallowed. The reasoning of the assessing officer in all these three years is that the assessee has not undertaken

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LARGE TAX PAYERS UNIT) KOLKATA vs. M/S CENTURY PLYBOARDS (I) LTD

ITA/65/2021HC Calcutta15 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 14ASection 260ASection 80I

deduction was disallowed. The reasoning of the assessing officer in all these three years is that the assessee has not undertaken

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S SUVARNA COMMERCIAL PVT LTD

ITAT/65/2021HC Calcutta17 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 14ASection 260ASection 80I

deduction was disallowed. The reasoning of the assessing officer in all these three years is that the assessee has not undertaken

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S SURENDRA STEELS PVT LTD

In the result, the appeal fails and the substantial question of law is

ITAT/23/2023HC Calcutta03 Apr 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Acting Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 3Rd April, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ….For Appellant Mr. Subash Agarwal, Adv. …For Respondent The Court : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20Th May, 2022 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, `B’ Bench, Kolkata In Ita No.78/Kol./2022 For The Assessment Year 2019-20. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Question Of Law For Consideration : - “Whether The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Has Committed Substantial Error In Law In Deleting The Addition Made On Account Of Disallowance Of Deduction Under Section 80-Ic Of The Act ? ”

Section 260ASection 80

disallowance of deduction under Section 80-IC of the Act ? ” 2 We have heard Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, learned standing Counsel

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-12,KOLKATA vs. M/S.SOORAJMULL NAGARMULL

In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the substantial questions of

ITAT/46/2020HC Calcutta23 Nov 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 148Section 260ASection 41Section 41(1)

disallowance of deduction and adding back the sum being unclaimed credit balances unilaterally written back (credited to the profit and loss

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4, KOLKATA vs. M/S. MACO CORPORATION INDIA PVT LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the

ITA/35/2021HC Calcutta12 Aug 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : August 12, 2022. Appearance : Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. …For Appellant. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv., Mr. Anil Kumar Dugar,Adv. Mr. R. Chatterjee,Adv. Mr. Subash Agarwal, Adv. ……For Respondent. The Court : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.4.2018 Passed By The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata [Tribunal] In I.T.A. No. 378/Kol/2017 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. The Appeal Was Admitted On 1.12.2021 To Decide The Following Question Of Law: A) Whether On The Facts & The Circumstances Of The Case The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata Erred In Law By Deleting The Disallowance Of Deduction Under Section 35(1) (Ii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Of Rs.4,37,50,000/-? B) Whether The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata Failed To Appreciate The Fact That The Assessee Company Had Debited Rs.2,50,00,000/- On Account Of Scientific Research

Section 14ASection 260ASection 35Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(iii)Section 35C

disallowance of deduction under section 35(1) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs.4,37,50,000/-? b) Whether

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1 KOLKATA vs. M/S MODERN GEARS PVT LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the

ITAT/35/2021HC Calcutta03 Feb 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : August 12, 2022. Appearance : Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. …For Appellant. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv., Mr. Anil Kumar Dugar,Adv. Mr. R. Chatterjee,Adv. Mr. Subash Agarwal, Adv. ……For Respondent. The Court : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.4.2018 Passed By The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata [Tribunal] In I.T.A. No. 378/Kol/2017 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. The Appeal Was Admitted On 1.12.2021 To Decide The Following Question Of Law: A) Whether On The Facts & The Circumstances Of The Case The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata Erred In Law By Deleting The Disallowance Of Deduction Under Section 35(1) (Ii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Of Rs.4,37,50,000/-? B) Whether The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata Failed To Appreciate The Fact That The Assessee Company Had Debited Rs.2,50,00,000/- On Account Of Scientific Research

Section 14ASection 260ASection 35Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(iii)Section 35C

disallowance of deduction under section 35(1) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs.4,37,50,000/-? b) Whether

RAMESH KUMAR NANGALIA KATRA (HUF) vs. COMMISSIONER I.TAX - XVI, KOLKATA

ITA/449/2004HC Calcutta09 Sept 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya Date : September 9, 2022. Appearance: Mr. Ananda Sen, Adv.. … For Appellant Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. …For Respondent The Court:- This Appeal By The Revenue Filed Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24Th September, 2003 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal). The Assessee Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration. 1. Whether, On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Tribunal Misdirected Itself In Law In Not Appreciating That All The Necessary Particulars For Verification Of The Allowability Of The Claim Of Deductibility Of The Commission Payment In Computation Of Income Were Found Out & Verified In The Order Of The First Appellate Authority, That Is The Commissioner Of Income Tax [Appeals] & Whether The Tribunal Was Justified In Law In Upholding The Disallowance Of Claim For Deduction Of The Commission Payment Made By The Assessing Officer & Whether The Finding Arrived At Was Perverse ?

Section 131Section 254(2)Section 260ASection 37

deductibility of the Commission payment in computation of income were found out and verified in the order of the First Appellate Authority, that is the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] and whether the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the disallowance

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL 1, KOLKATA vs. M/S MBL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED

Accordingly, the appeal fails and dismissed

ITAT/125/2022HC Calcutta12 Sept 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya Date : September 12, 2022. Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. … For Appellant Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. …For Respondent The Court :- This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22Nd October 2020 Passed In

Section 260ASection 263Section 80I

disallowance of claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act ? 2 ii) WHETHER in the facts and circumstances of the case

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 KOLKATA vs. SRI RAHUL SARAF

The appeal stands disposed of on the ground of low tax effect

ITAT/218/2024HC Calcutta20 Sept 2024

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : September 20, 2024. Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. Ms. Doyel Dey, Adv. …For Appellant. Mr. Soumitra Chowdhury, Adv. Mr. Avra Mazumder, Adv. Mr. Pranabesh Sarkar, Adv. Mr. Suman Bhowmik, Adv. Mr. Samrat Das, Adv. Ms. Elina Dey, Adv. Mr. Sourendra Nath Banerjee, Adv. …For Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 260ASection 54F

disallowance of claim and deduction under Section 54F considering the facts of the case of the assessee for assessment year

THE WEST BENGAL STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-32, KOLKATA

The appeal is disposed of and the substantial question of law is answered

ITAT/35/2025HC Calcutta20 Aug 2025

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 20Th August, 2025. Appearance :

Section 260ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

disallowance of claim of Deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) for interest income of Rs.55,08,000/- and Interest

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BURDWAN vs. M/S. THE BURDWAN CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are

ITA/63/2008HC Calcutta16 Mar 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 16Th March, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ...For The Appellant In Ita/63/2008. Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. ...For The Appellant In Ita/837/2008.. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Das, Adv. Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. ...For The Respondent. The Court : This Appeal (Ita/63/2008) Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’ For Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27Th June, 2007 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata (The Tribunal) In Ita No.1279 & 1280/Kol/2007 Years 2003-04 & 2004-05.

Section 147Section 24Section 260ASection 264Section 56Section 80

disallowing the claim for deduction u/s. 80(P)(2)(a)(i) relying on the said judgment of the Supreme Court

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. BALMER LAWRIE AND CO LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed on the ground

ITAT/259/2022HC Calcutta13 Apr 2023

Bench: HON'BLE T.S. SIVAGNANAM, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 143(3)Section 260A

disallowance treating the same as deductable expenditure under Section 37 of the Act. Further the assessing officer in regular assessment