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.

8 results for “disallowance”+ Section 40A(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,530Mumbai1,502Chennai670Kolkata658Bangalore547Ahmedabad193Pune185Jaipur142Hyderabad137Raipur112Surat96Indore92Amritsar74Chandigarh64Nagpur57Cuttack50Visakhapatnam48Rajkot46Cochin43Lucknow41Karnataka31Agra28Jodhpur21Allahabad19Patna19Dehradun16Guwahati14SC12Calcutta8Ranchi5Varanasi5Telangana4Jabalpur3Kerala2Punjab & Haryana2Rajasthan1J&K1Panaji1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 40A(3)11Section 260A8Section 43B7Section 143(3)6Section 80H4Deduction4Addition to Income4Section 403Disallowance3Section 133(6)

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , KOL-II,KOLKATA vs. BHARTIYA HOTELS LTD

ITAT/170/2014HC Calcutta05 Jul 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

Section 255(4)Section 260ASection 40A(3)

disallowed 20% of such payment 5 under Section 40A(3). However, the assessing officer was not in a position to actually

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA - 4 vs. M/S STANDARD LEATHER PVT LTD

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

ITAT/133/2017HC Calcutta07 Jan 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE ANANDA KUMAR MUKHERJEE

2
Section 1952
Capital Gains2
For Appellant: Mr. Debasish Choudhury, Adv
For Respondent: Mr. Sukalpa Seal, Adv
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 40A(3)

40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ Bench was correct in holding that the purchases were made from the persons covered by the provisions of Rule 6DD(e) of the Income Tax Rules, without having any material on record

PRINCIPAL COMM OF INCOME TAX -4, KOLKATA vs. M/S LINDE INDIA LIMITED

ITAT/338/2016HC Calcutta05 Sept 2022

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

For Respondent: Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 195Section 260ASection 40Section 5Section 50CSection 9

3) of the said Act. The first appellate authority by an order dated March 30, 2011 allowed the said appeal in part. By the said order the first appellate authority held that the Assessing Officer was not justified in making the disallowance of Rs.72,89,71,972/- and directed deletion of the amount disallowed by the Assessing Officer on such

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

Section 40A (3) and Rule 6DD (j). No disallowance could have been made in view of the provisions of S. 40A

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

3 building was a capital receipt without examining the nature, specific terms and conditions of each of the contracts? (e) Whether the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in presuming that the investment in tax freе securities were made out of own interest free fund and thereby deleting the disallowance of Rs.21,16,23,729/- of interest in terms

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-14, KOLKATA vs. PKS HOLDINGS

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the question nos

ITAT/62/2017HC Calcutta03 Aug 2022

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260A

3 same, the ledger copy of the stock broker namely, M/s. Silpa Stock Broker Private Limited and Form 10DB was filed to substantiate the same. On considering the materials placed before the Assessing Officer, it was pointed out that on 27th November, 2006 the assessee sold its land and earned profits to the tune of several crores and immediately

PRINCIPAL COMM OF INCOME TAX, ASANSOL vs. M/S EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD

Accordingly, the appeal fails and it is dismissed

ITAT/230/2017HC Calcutta14 Dec 2021

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

Section 260Section 32Section 40A(9)

40A(9) of the Act? c) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, was justified in reversing the finding of CIT (Appeals) in deleting the addition

C.I.T CENTRAL I vs. J. K. INDUSTRIES LTD.

ITA/268/2005HC Calcutta07 Feb 2023

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

Section 115JSection 260ASection 40A(9)Section 80H

40A(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and in that view deleting the disallowance of Rs.17,05,646/- ? 2 ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case ITAT erred in law in upholding CIT(A)’s decision in directing the AO to deduct the amount of Rs.20,45,07,768/- from the net profit to arrive