Search: disallowance | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

233 results for “disallowance”+ Penaltyclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,363 Delhi4,440 Bangalore1,025 Chennai1,016 Kolkata1,007 Ahmedabad898 Jaipur551 Pune523 Hyderabad439 Indore345 Surat250 Chandigarh233 Raipur168 Rajkot140 Lucknow113 Agra107 Nagpur101 Cochin100 Cuttack85 Amritsar69 Visakhapatnam68 Karnataka67 Guwahati53 Allahabad52 SC47 Calcutta43 Ranchi38 Telangana35 Dehradun34 Jodhpur31 Varanasi31 Patna27 Panaji25 Jabalpur18 Kerala6 Punjab & Haryana5 Rajasthan3 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2 Himachal Pradesh1 Gauhati1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Orissa1 RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Section 26386 Section 143(3)68 Addition to Income67 Section 143(2)45 Penalty45 Section 80I30 Section 142(1)30 Deduction30 Section 27128 Disallowance

M/S CORE METAL KRAFTS LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, C-5(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 347/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.Meenakshi Vohra, Addl. CIT

Section 250(6)Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 43B

disallowance ESI penalty. The disallowance of ESI penalty does not warrant invocation of any penalty as it does not amount

Showing 1–20 of 233 · Page 1 of 12

...

26

SHIVA SPECIALITY YARNS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I, LUDHIANA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 1049/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Navneet Sehgal, CA and Ms. Naina Gaba Sehgal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 143(2)Section 270ASection 80

disallowed an expenditure of Rs.3,80,353/-. This amount represent an expenditure incurred on payment of some penalty. Similarly, he disallowed

THE KANGRA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,DHARAMSHALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PALAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 805/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

For Respondent: \nShri Ashwani Kumar, C.A

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowed said amounts and included\nsame in income of assessee and also imposed penalty upon it under section\n271(1)(c), penalty

THE KANGRA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,DHARAMSHALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PALAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 804/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowed said amounts and included same in income of assessee and also imposed penalty upon it under section 271(1)(c), penalty

ITO,, LUDHIANA vs. M/S A.K. EXPORTS,, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue as well as the appeal and cross-objection of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 375/CHANDI/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jul 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.799/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.965/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.375/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.800/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ito M/S A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.988/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 6. Co No/25.Chandi/2010 (In Ita No.375/Chandi/2010) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S A.K. Exports Ito F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar बनाम/ Vs. Ward 1(1) Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal(CIT) a/w Shri Vivek

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69CSection 80I

disallowance of DEPB amounts / DEPB scripts purchased and utilized by the importer, imposition of penalty, disallowance of duty drawback etc. It is quite

M/S A.K. EXPORTS,,LUDHIANA vs. ITO,, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue as well as the appeal and cross-objection of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 988/CHANDI/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jul 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.799/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.965/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.375/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.800/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ito M/S A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.988/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 6. Co No/25.Chandi/2010 (In Ita No.375/Chandi/2010) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S A.K. Exports Ito F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar बनाम/ Vs. Ward 1(1) Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal(CIT) a/w Shri Vivek

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69CSection 80I

disallowance of DEPB amounts / DEPB scripts purchased and utilized by the importer, imposition of penalty, disallowance of duty drawback etc. It is quite

ITO -I(1),, LUDHIANA vs. M/S A.K. EXPORTS,, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue as well as the appeal and cross-objection of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 965/CHANDI/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jul 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.799/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.965/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.375/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.800/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ito M/S A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.988/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 6. Co No/25.Chandi/2010 (In Ita No.375/Chandi/2010) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S A.K. Exports Ito F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar बनाम/ Vs. Ward 1(1) Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal(CIT) a/w Shri Vivek

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69CSection 80I

disallowance of DEPB amounts / DEPB scripts purchased and utilized by the importer, imposition of penalty, disallowance of duty drawback etc. It is quite

ITO, LUDHIANA vs. M/S A.K. EXPORTS, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue as well as the appeal and cross-objection of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 800/CHANDI/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jul 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.799/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.965/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.375/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.800/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ito M/S A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.988/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 6. Co No/25.Chandi/2010 (In Ita No.375/Chandi/2010) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S A.K. Exports Ito F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar बनाम/ Vs. Ward 1(1) Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal(CIT) a/w Shri Vivek

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69CSection 80I

disallowance of DEPB amounts / DEPB scripts purchased and utilized by the importer, imposition of penalty, disallowance of duty drawback etc. It is quite

ITO, LUDHIANA vs. M/S A.K. EXPORTS, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue as well as the appeal and cross-objection of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 799/CHANDI/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jul 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.799/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.965/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.375/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.800/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ito M/S A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.988/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 6. Co No/25.Chandi/2010 (In Ita No.375/Chandi/2010) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S A.K. Exports Ito F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar बनाम/ Vs. Ward 1(1) Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal(CIT) a/w Shri Vivek

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69CSection 80I

disallowance of DEPB amounts / DEPB scripts purchased and utilized by the importer, imposition of penalty, disallowance of duty drawback etc. It is quite

HEALTH BIOTECH LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 987/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: the disposal of the same.

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.A (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) as well as excess depreciation claimed. The penalty order unequivocally states that the penalty

DCIT-CC-III, LUDHIANA vs. M/S SEL TEXTILE LTD, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 206/CHANDI/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 271A

penalty is the disallowance u/s 14A offered after making statement u/s 132(4). As per the AR, the appellate made

DCIT, C-5, LUDHIANA vs. M/S HERO CYCLES LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed and the Cross

ITA 1493/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CIT

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

disallowed and added back to the taxable income of the assessee. Penalty proceeding u/s 271(l)(c) is initiated separately

VARDHMAN SPECIAL STEELS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA

ITA 79/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 May 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: \nShri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nDr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 270ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 57

disallowed Rs.556/-, the remaining Rs.1,78,314/-\nwas added back to the taxable income. The AO also started penalty\nproceedings

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARD, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 102/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Jindal, CA &For Respondent: Smt.C. Chandrakanta, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

penalty on account of disallowance of interest expenditure by relying upon the 'record of discussions' which were specific to the assessment

M/S EFFIEL ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. LD.JCIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 543/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 40Section 40aSection 56(2)(viib)

disallowing of fine and penalty, Rs.3,60,281/- by applying provisions of Section 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act, Rs.2

M/S EFFIEL ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 542/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 40Section 40aSection 56(2)(viib)

disallowing of fine and penalty, Rs.3,60,281/- by applying provisions of Section 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act, Rs.2

M/S HIMACHAL FASHION PVT. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-6(3), LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 8/CHANDI/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Krinwant Sahay & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 8/Chd/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Danish Abdullah, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 27lSection 80Section 80ASection 80I

disallowance claimed by the assessee. Simultaneously, penalty proceedings under section 27l(l)(c) of I. T. Act, 1961 were initiated

ASPEE SONS,SOLAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PARWANOO, PARWANOO

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

ITA 1167/CHANDI/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80I

disallowances: (i) Rs. 18,33,710/- towards ineligible profits from insurance claims and foreign exchange fluctuation not derived from manufacturing activity, and (ii) Rs. 9,86,497/- for excess deduction on additional depreciation. Penalty

SH. JAGMOHAN SINGH,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 421/CHANDI/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 54

disallowed and an amount of Rs. 38,65,580/- was brought to tax under the head “long term capital gains”. Separately, penalty

M/S IOL CHEMICALS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ADDL. CIT, R-I, LUDHIANA

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

ITA 1419/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CIT

Section 115JSection 250(6)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 41(1)

disallowed and added to the total income. Penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(c) are initiated on this point for submitting