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.

77 results for “disallowance”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai8,788Delhi5,779Chennai3,140Kolkata2,400Bangalore2,326Ahmedabad1,020Pune827Hyderabad602Jaipur582Cochin325Indore308Chandigarh287Karnataka262Surat257Nagpur243Raipur235Lucknow222Rajkot208Visakhapatnam169Cuttack122Amritsar114Calcutta77Guwahati74Jodhpur65SC61Telangana54Panaji46Agra46Ranchi44Dehradun37Patna36Kerala24Allahabad21Varanasi17Jabalpur17Punjab & Haryana8Orissa8Rajasthan7Himachal Pradesh5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Gauhati2ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Section 14A45Section 260A41Section 80I38Disallowance32Section 6820Exemption17Addition to Income16Section 143(3)12Long Term Capital Gains11Section 80H

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S ITC LTD

ITAT/89/2025HC Calcutta21 Jul 2025

Bench: The Learned Tribunal – One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue Which Have Been Disposed Of By A Common Order, Impugned In This Appeal. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration :

For Appellant: Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate
Section 14ASection 260ASection 37(1)Section 40a

disallowed and earning of exempt income had not been established. The disallowance under Section 14A of the Act for the investment

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-2, KOLKATA vs. WEST BENGAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORP. LTD.

Showing 1–20 of 77 · Page 1 of 4

10
Section 133(6)9
Deduction9
ITAT/49/2018HC Calcutta17 Dec 2021

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

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 260A

disallowances made under Section 14A read with R.8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 only in respect of investment which yielded and exempted

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION,KOLKATA vs. MAA SARASWATI GYAN MANDIR EDUCATION SOCIETY

ITAT/44/2022HC Calcutta26 Jul 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak Date : 26Th July, 2022 Appearance :- Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. … For Appellant Mr. S.M. Surana, Adv. Mr. Bhaskar Sengupta, Adv. Md. Afzal Ansari, Adv. … For Respondent

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 260A

exemption under section 11(1A) of the Act since the tax effect on this issue is less than the threshold limit? (iii) Whether disallowance

M/S. SHEO SHAKTI COKE INDUSTRIES vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 37, KOLKATA

In the result, the writ petition is dismissed

ITAT/1/2022HC Calcutta08 Apr 2022

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

Section 33A

exemption from tax under Rule 33A of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 (the Rules) in respect of the sales made to the writ petitioner amounting to Rs. 18,60,65,057/-. The assessing authority of the said bank disallowed

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

disallowed and earning of exempt income. The respondents as earlier noted, have failed to substantiate their argument that the assessee

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

disallowed and earning of exempt income. The respondents as earlier noted, have failed to substantiate their argument that the assessee

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

disallowed and earning of exempt income. The respondents as earlier noted, have failed to substantiate their argument that the assessee

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

disallowed and earning of exempt income. The respondents as earlier noted, have failed to substantiate their argument that the assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. M/S STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA EMPLOYEES CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the

ITAT/62/2023HC Calcutta10 Apr 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Acting Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 10Th April, 2023 Appearance : Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. …For The Appellant Mr. Saumya Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. G.S. Gupta, Adv. …For The Respondent The Court : We Have Heard Ms. Smita Das De, Learned Standing Counsel For The Appellant & Mr. Saumya Kejriwal, Learned Counsel For The Respondent. There Is A Delay Of 168 Days In Filing These Appeals.

Section 14ASection 260A

disallowances under Section 14A of the said Act was not applicable on the exempt income earned by the assessee ? b) Whether

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. M/S STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA EMPLOYEES CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the

ITAT/63/2023HC Calcutta10 Apr 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Acting Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 10Th April, 2023 Appearance : Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. …For The Appellant Mr. Saumya Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. G.S. Gupta, Adv. …For The Respondent The Court : We Have Heard Ms. Smita Das De, Learned Standing Counsel For The Appellant & Mr. Saumya Kejriwal, Learned Counsel For The Respondent. There Is A Delay Of 168 Days In Filing These Appeals.

Section 14ASection 260A

disallowances under Section 14A of the said Act was not applicable on the exempt income earned by the assessee ? b) Whether

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 KOLKATA vs. RAGHVENDRA MOHTA

The appeal is dismissed and the substantial questions of

ITAT/51/2025HC Calcutta05 May 2025

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 5Th May, 2025.

Section 120Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 68Section 69C

disallowing the assessee’s claim of exemption of bogus LTCG without going into the merits of the case and examining

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4, KOLKATA vs. M/S. RELIANCE CHEMOTEX INDUSTRIES LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands

ITAT/308/2018HC Calcutta17 Feb 2022

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

Section 14ASection 260A

disallowance under the said provision cannot exceed the exempt income. We find no error in approach of the tribunal. Thus

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. ISG TRADERS LTD

Accordingly, the appeal fails and dismissed

ITAT/143/2022HC Calcutta12 Sept 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya Date : September 12, 2022. Appearance: Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. … For Appellant Mr. Moloy Dhar, Adv. …For Respondent The Court : Heard Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Learned Standing Counsel For The Appellant & Mr. Moloy Dhar, Advocate Learned Advocate For The Respondent. There Is A Delay Of 559 Days In Filing The Appeal. Though The Explanation Offered Is Not Fully Satisfactory, Since We Have Suggested That The Appeal Itslef Can Be Heard & Submissions Were Heard On The Merits Of The Matter We Exercise Discretion & Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal. The Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 5Th June, 2020 Passed By The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench Kolkata In Ita No. 1610/Kol/2019 For The Assessment Year 2012-13.

Section 14ASection 260A

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act is to be restricted to the amount of exempt income only and not to a higher

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SREI INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE LIMITED

Accordingly the same stands dismissed without

ITAT/147/2024HC Calcutta24 May 2024

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 24Th May, 2024. Appearance : Mr. Aryak Dutt, Adv. Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. …For Appellant.

Section 14ASection 2Section 260ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 55

disallowance u/s 14A can be done considering only those investment which yielded exempt income during 4 the year whereas explicit

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S EDMOND FINVEST PVT LTD

ITAT/28/2024HC Calcutta26 Feb 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 26Th February, 2024. Appearance : Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv. …For Respondent The Court :- Heard Learned Counsel On Both Sides. This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16Th May, 2023 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ‘B’ Bench, Kolkata In I.T.A. No. 96/Kol/2021 For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Low For Consideration :- I) Whether The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Has Committed Substantial Error In Law In Upholding The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Deleting The Addition Made Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On Account Of Unexplained Unsecured Loan Transactions & Interest Expense Corresponding To Such Unexplained Loan Transactions By Holding That The Assessing Officer

Section 14ASection 260ASection 68

disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is not dependent on the amount of exempt income earned

PRINCIPAL COMM OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL , KOLKATA 2 vs. M/S HOOGLY MILLS CO LTD

The appeal stands disposed of on the ground of low tax

ITAT/10/2018HC Calcutta14 Feb 2022

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

Section 14ASection 260A

disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be made in a year in which no exempt

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. JEMISH SHAH

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/57/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

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

disallowance of Long Term Capital Gains of Rs. 28,23,500/- overlooking the fact that the entire transactions were stage managed with the object to facilitate the assessee to plough back its unaccounted income in the form of fictitious Long Term Capital Gains of Rs. 28,23,500/- and claim bogus exemption

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-SILIGURI vs. SHEKHAR AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/139/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

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

disallowance of Long Term Capital Gains of Rs. 28,23,500/- overlooking the fact that the entire transactions were stage managed with the object to facilitate the assessee to plough back its unaccounted income in the form of fictitious Long Term Capital Gains of Rs. 28,23,500/- and claim bogus exemption

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SILIGURI vs. SRI SATYA NARAYAN SARIA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/168/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

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

disallowance of Long Term Capital Gains of Rs. 28,23,500/- overlooking the fact that the entire transactions were stage managed with the object to facilitate the assessee to plough back its unaccounted income in the form of fictitious Long Term Capital Gains of Rs. 28,23,500/- and claim bogus exemption

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ASANSOL KOLKATA vs. RAKESH JHUNJHUNWALA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/27/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

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

disallowance of Long Term Capital Gains of Rs. 28,23,500/- overlooking the fact that the entire transactions were stage managed with the object to facilitate the assessee to plough back its unaccounted income in the form of fictitious Long Term Capital Gains of Rs. 28,23,500/- and claim bogus exemption