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.

6 results for “disallowance”+ Section 161(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai956Delhi853Kolkata252Chennai242Bangalore241Ahmedabad213Jaipur198Pune138Hyderabad114Cochin91Indore76Chandigarh61Raipur55Surat52Panaji45Nagpur31Lucknow28Visakhapatnam24Allahabad21Amritsar13Rajkot11Karnataka11Agra10SC9Patna8Dehradun6Guwahati6Calcutta6Cuttack5Telangana4Jodhpur3Kerala3Ranchi3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Rajasthan1Punjab & Haryana1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 80H10Section 143(3)6Section 2636Section 685Section 260A4Section 142(1)2Disallowance2

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

161 (Cochin), by judgment dated 14.9.1995 held that loss was to be ignored while computing the deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act. The assessing officer discussed the case with the assessee and passed an assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act dated 3.3.1997 allowing deduction under Section 80HHC of Rs.3,54,97,167/- in terms

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S ZULU MERCHANDISE PVT LTD

The appeal is allowed the order passed by

ITAT/88/2025HC Calcutta
01 Aug 2025

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 260ASection 68

1. This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated September 23, 2024 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Kolkata (tribunal) in ITA No. 553/Kol/2024 for the assessment year 2014-2015. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S RABINDRA ENTERPRISES PVT LTD

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

ITAT/231/2024HC Calcutta16 Jun 2025

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Dated : 16Th June, 2025 Appearance: Mr. Aryak Dutt, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. ..For Appellant Mr. Subash Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Rajarshi Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Amit Shaw, Adv. Ms. Suman Sahani, Adv. …Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 68

disallowance made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by holding that assessee had discharged its onus to prove identity and creditworthiness of the share subscriber without considering that identity, creditworthiness or genuineness of the transaction is not established by merely showing that the transaction was through banking channels or by account payee instrument as held

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. SUMAN KUMAR

ITAT/128/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: :

161 to TATA and recorded such fact in its letter dated February 19, 2018. Out of Rs. 69,27,600 ASA's representative had also agreed to pay the remaining amount of Rs. 60,22,439/- in monthly instalments of Rs. 5,00,000/- each. The appellant alleged that ASA and SKS were fully aware of such excess rebates

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. SAJJADBHAI NURUDDIN NANDARBARWAL

ITAT/129/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: :

161 to TATA and recorded such fact in its letter dated February 19, 2018. Out of Rs. 69,27,600 ASA's representative had also agreed to pay the remaining amount of Rs. 60,22,439/- in monthly instalments of Rs. 5,00,000/- each. The appellant alleged that ASA and SKS were fully aware of such excess rebates

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. RANISATI HOSIERY PVT LTD

ITAT/251/2024HC Calcutta09 Jun 2025

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 9Th June, 2025.

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263

1) dated 17.08.2016 and fix the case for hearing. The assessee was represented by their authorized representative in the hearing fixed on 19th August, 2016 and they produced a copy of the income tax return, audited accounts, details of directors, share trading, registered office, details of increase of share capital, Form-2 and Form-5, shareholders list, bank account details