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.

170 results for “disallowance”+ Section 145(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,781Delhi1,450Jaipur485Kolkata472Chennai397Ahmedabad394Bangalore389Surat220Hyderabad213Chandigarh170Pune167Indore129Agra123Raipur111Cochin105Amritsar88Rajkot85Cuttack82Visakhapatnam78Lucknow68Allahabad54Nagpur45Ranchi45Calcutta39Karnataka32Jodhpur29Telangana27Patna19Guwahati18SC18Dehradun13Varanasi10Panaji10Jabalpur6Punjab & Haryana4Himachal Pradesh3Rajasthan1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Addition to Income41Section 143(3)37Section 14834Section 153A30Section 26330Section 13(3)24Section 25021Section 145(3)18Section 153D17

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

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 588/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 588/Chd/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 The DCIT C-V, Ludhiana बनाम M/s Hero Cycles Ltd. Hero Nagar, G.T. Road Ludhiana स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACH4073P अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 473/Chd/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 M/s Hero Cycles Ltd. Hero Nagar, G.T. Road Ludhiana बनाम The ACIT C-V, Ludhiana स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACH4073P

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, Shri Ashish Aggarwal &For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

145 Taxmann.com 641 (Delhi) relied by the appellant has held as under: "While section 14A is charging section, rule 8D is method/mechanism to determine the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to income, which does not form part of the total income of the assessee. By virtue of the charging section, namely, section 14A, the Assessing Officer has the power

Showing 1–20 of 170 · Page 1 of 9

...
Reopening of Assessment14
Disallowance13
Bogus Purchases11

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

ITA 559/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta
Section 14ASection 36Section 80I

1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in restricting the addition from Rs. 36,02,230/-to Rs. 5,31,145/- thereby deleting the disallowance of Rs. 30,71,085/- made by invoking the provisions of section

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

ITA 557/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta
Section 14ASection 36Section 80I

1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in restricting the addition from Rs. 36,02,230/-to Rs. 5,31,145/- thereby deleting the disallowance of Rs. 30,71,085/- made by invoking the provisions of section

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

ITA 555/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta
Section 14ASection 36Section 80I

1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in restricting the addition from Rs. 36,02,230/-to Rs. 5,31,145/- thereby deleting the disallowance of Rs. 30,71,085/- made by invoking the provisions of section

ACIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS. BECTORS FOOD SPECIALTIES PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

ITA 405/CHANDI/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta
Section 14ASection 36Section 80I

1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in restricting the addition from Rs. 36,02,230/-to Rs. 5,31,145/- thereby deleting the disallowance of Rs. 30,71,085/- made by invoking the provisions of section

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

ITA 558/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta
Section 14ASection 36Section 80I

1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in restricting the addition from Rs. 36,02,230/-to Rs. 5,31,145/- thereby deleting the disallowance of Rs. 30,71,085/- made by invoking the provisions of section

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

ITA 556/CHANDI/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta
Section 14ASection 36Section 80I

1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in restricting the addition from Rs. 36,02,230/-to Rs. 5,31,145/- thereby deleting the disallowance of Rs. 30,71,085/- made by invoking the provisions of section

SH. VIJAY KUMAR SINGH,BADDI vs. ITO , BADDI

ITA 14/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 18/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Dcit, Central Circle, Smt. Madhubala बनाम Patiala W/O Sh. Krishan Gopal, Ward No.1, Lehargaga, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anjpb7890D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Vibhore Garg, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR

disallowance shall be made for employers’ share of contribution which is deposited before 'due date' of filing of return of Income. However, it further clarifies that this Circular does not apply to claim of deduction relating to employee's contribution to welfare funds which are governed by section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 4.6 Another argument of the Ld.DR

PARMINDER SINGH,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, LUDHIANA

ITA 12/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 18/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Dcit, Central Circle, Smt. Madhubala बनाम Patiala W/O Sh. Krishan Gopal, Ward No.1, Lehargaga, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anjpb7890D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Vibhore Garg, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR

disallowance shall be made for employers’ share of contribution which is deposited before 'due date' of filing of return of Income. However, it further clarifies that this Circular does not apply to claim of deduction relating to employee's contribution to welfare funds which are governed by section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 4.6 Another argument of the Ld.DR

METALMAN AUTO PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE -1,, LUDHIANA

ITA 32/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 18/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Dcit, Central Circle, Smt. Madhubala बनाम Patiala W/O Sh. Krishan Gopal, Ward No.1, Lehargaga, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anjpb7890D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Vibhore Garg, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR

disallowance shall be made for employers’ share of contribution which is deposited before 'due date' of filing of return of Income. However, it further clarifies that this Circular does not apply to claim of deduction relating to employee's contribution to welfare funds which are governed by section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 4.6 Another argument of the Ld.DR

VIDYADHAR TIWARI,BADDI vs. ITO, , BADDI

ITA 16/CHANDI/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 18/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Dcit, Central Circle, Smt. Madhubala बनाम Patiala W/O Sh. Krishan Gopal, Ward No.1, Lehargaga, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anjpb7890D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Vibhore Garg, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR

disallowance shall be made for employers’ share of contribution which is deposited before 'due date' of filing of return of Income. However, it further clarifies that this Circular does not apply to claim of deduction relating to employee's contribution to welfare funds which are governed by section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 4.6 Another argument of the Ld.DR

SANDEEP GUPTA,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 3(1),, CHANDIGARH

ITA 31/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 18/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Dcit, Central Circle, Smt. Madhubala बनाम Patiala W/O Sh. Krishan Gopal, Ward No.1, Lehargaga, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anjpb7890D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Vibhore Garg, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR

disallowance shall be made for employers’ share of contribution which is deposited before 'due date' of filing of return of Income. However, it further clarifies that this Circular does not apply to claim of deduction relating to employee's contribution to welfare funds which are governed by section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 4.6 Another argument of the Ld.DR

TEGSONS INDIA,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, WARD 1(3), LUDHIANA

ITA 78/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 18/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Dcit, Central Circle, Smt. Madhubala बनाम Patiala W/O Sh. Krishan Gopal, Ward No.1, Lehargaga, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anjpb7890D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Vibhore Garg, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR

disallowance shall be made for employers’ share of contribution which is deposited before 'due date' of filing of return of Income. However, it further clarifies that this Circular does not apply to claim of deduction relating to employee's contribution to welfare funds which are governed by section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 4.6 Another argument of the Ld.DR

RIDE LINK AUTO,LUDHIANA vs. ITO WARD 7 (1), LUDHIANA

ITA 394/CHANDI/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Apr 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 18/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Dcit, Central Circle, Smt. Madhubala बनाम Patiala W/O Sh. Krishan Gopal, Ward No.1, Lehargaga, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anjpb7890D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Vibhore Garg, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR

disallowance shall be made for employers’ share of contribution which is deposited before 'due date' of filing of return of Income. However, it further clarifies that this Circular does not apply to claim of deduction relating to employee's contribution to welfare funds which are governed by section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 4.6 Another argument of the Ld.DR

ITO, WARD 6(1), LUDHIANA vs. SH. SITA RAM SINGLA, LUDHIANA

ITA 418/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 18/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Dcit, Central Circle, Smt. Madhubala बनाम Patiala W/O Sh. Krishan Gopal, Ward No.1, Lehargaga, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anjpb7890D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Vibhore Garg, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR

disallowance shall be made for employers’ share of contribution which is deposited before 'due date' of filing of return of Income. However, it further clarifies that this Circular does not apply to claim of deduction relating to employee's contribution to welfare funds which are governed by section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 4.6 Another argument of the Ld.DR

SH. VIJAY KUMAR SINGH,BADDI vs. ITO , BADDI

ITA 15/CHANDI/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 18/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Dcit, Central Circle, Smt. Madhubala बनाम Patiala W/O Sh. Krishan Gopal, Ward No.1, Lehargaga, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anjpb7890D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Vibhore Garg, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR

disallowance shall be made for employers’ share of contribution which is deposited before 'due date' of filing of return of Income. However, it further clarifies that this Circular does not apply to claim of deduction relating to employee's contribution to welfare funds which are governed by section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 4.6 Another argument of the Ld.DR

M/S PAGRO FROZEN FOODS PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, W-2(3), CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 1076/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253

1) in any previous year, owing to there being no profits or gains chargeable for that previous year, or owing to the profits or gains chargeable being less than the allowance, then, subject to the provisions of sub- section (2) of section 72 and sub-section (3) of section 73, the allowance or the part of the allowance to which

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the impugned order is sustained and appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 611/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate and Ms. Somya Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum, CIT, DR
Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 250Section 251Section 253Section 43B

disallowed by the Assessing Officer in the order under section 143(3) on the basis of observations of the accountant in his report in Form 3CD, has been deposited before due date of filing of ITR u/s 139(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 merely on the basis of a bald certificate issued by a C.A. (v) The appellant craves

AKM RESORTS,MOHALI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 5(1), CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 42/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: This Tribunal. The Assessee

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, CA &For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and that he has no explanation to offer. 2.5 The ld. AO keeping in view that the assessee has not filed any reply was left with no other option but to decide the issue of penalty on merits on the basis of material available on record. ITA 42/CHD/2024

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 29/CHANDI/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

disallowance of salary though he proceeded with the fact that the salary was not commensurate with duties being performed and that up to the A.Y. 2012-13 the salary was allowed by the successive assessing officer by way of orders under section 143(3) of the Act. It was stated that even if there was violation of Section