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.

56 results for “disallowance”+ Section 199clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai321Delhi301Hyderabad78Bangalore75Chennai73Jaipur60Ahmedabad58Chandigarh56Kolkata48Rajkot42Raipur39Pune35Indore32Lucknow29Jodhpur26Allahabad23Visakhapatnam18Cochin13Nagpur7Cuttack6SC5Surat4Agra2Amritsar2Jabalpur1Ranchi1Panaji1Guwahati1Varanasi1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 26342Deemed Dividend21Section 153A20Section 13220Section 153D20Section 143(3)18Section 12718Section 14715Addition to Income14

PUNJAB SMALL INDUSTRIES AND EXPORT CORPORATION LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 627/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40aSection 43B

Section 43B: Disallowed Rs. 37,50,000 (bonus) and Rs. 45,28,750 (ex-gratia) as they were paid on October 28, 2016, after the return filing due date (October 17, 2016). The Commissioner upheld this, dismissing the appellant’s plea for allowance in A.Y. 2017-18 as outside the appeal’s scope. (ii) Rs. 5,78,199

Showing 1–20 of 56 · Page 1 of 3

Section 1113
Deduction7
Disallowance7

YOGESH CHANDER & SONS HUF,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(1), LUDHIANA

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

ITA 625/CHANDI/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the CPC holding that the appellant had not fulfilled the conditions of the proviso to Rule 37BA(2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, namely (i) filing of declaration with the deductor, and (ii) reporting of tax deduction by the deductor in the name of the other person.

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Kumar Bansal, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Add. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 199Section 250

199 but has wrongly rejected the claim only on the basis of procedural lapse. 5. The appellant craves leave, to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of the hearing. 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee, a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), filed its return of income declaring total income

SH. RAKESH KUMAR SINGLA,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, WARD-6(1), LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 46/CHANDI/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA and Ms. Muskan Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT-Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 199Section 250(6)

disallowing the credit of Rs.3,37,091/- and allowing, instead, refund of only Rs.1,03,070/-, including interest. In response to the intimation issued u/s 143(1), the assessee filed a rectification application on 04.04.2022. This was accepted by the AO and the assessee was issued additional refund of Rs.3,42,150/-, including interest, vide order dated 06.06.2022. Thereafter

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH vs. DEEP KAUR PANNU THROUGH L/H RANJI SINGH PANNU & GURBILAS PLATO SINGH PANNU, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 987/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 987/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Dcit, Deep Kaur Pannu, Circle 1(1), बनाम # 1070, Chandigarh Sector 15-B, Vs. Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Abmpk1575B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Manoj Goyal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.05.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.08.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 24.7.2024 Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Manoj Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 54F

section 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and computing income from House Property (H.No. 199, Tehsil Pura, at Amritsar), let out by the assessee. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any ground of appeal before the final hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case, as submitted by the Assessee

SURYA MOTORS,ABOHAR vs. DCIT, CC-3, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 302/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 302/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Surya Motors, Vs. The Dcit, Near Dav Campus, बनाम Central Circle-3, Hanuman Road, Ludhiana Abohar "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadfs2727B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : None ( Written Submissions ) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Dharam Vir, Jcit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.05.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2024 आदेश/Order Per Dr. Krinwant Sahay, A.M.: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana (Herein Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’ ) Dated 10.03.2023. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- 1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Rejecting The Claim Of Tds Of Rs. 41157/- Relating To National Insurance Co. Ltd.

For Appellant: None ( written submissions )For Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)

disallowance of credit of TDS is excessive & unreasonable. 5. That the humble appellant prays for permission to add or amend any grounds of appeal before disposal of the appeal. 3. During proceedings before us, the ld. Counsel of the Assessee has filed a letter dated 3.4.2024 in which he has requested to dispose of the appeal on the basis

J.K.EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 126/ASR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

199 to 213 of the paper-book and the relevant Para 8 on Page No.212 is reproduced hereunder:- "8. Disallowance o f excess rent: On Perusal of the same it is also found that assessee is paying huge rent to M/s Lata Daswandi Ram Family Trust against the land which is not reasonable. On perusal of the payments compared

J.K. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU & KASHMIR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION)-CIRCLE-1,, CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 428/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

199 to 213 of the paper-book and the relevant Para 8 on Page No.212 is reproduced hereunder:- "8. Disallowance o f excess rent: On Perusal of the same it is also found that assessee is paying huge rent to M/s Lata Daswandi Ram Family Trust against the land which is not reasonable. On perusal of the payments compared

J. K. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 685/CHANDI/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

199 to 213 of the paper-book and the relevant Para 8 on Page No.212 is reproduced hereunder:- "8. Disallowance o f excess rent: On Perusal of the same it is also found that assessee is paying huge rent to M/s Lata Daswandi Ram Family Trust against the land which is not reasonable. On perusal of the payments compared

DCIT, C-1 (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SHRI AUROBINDO SOCIO ECONOMIC & MANAGEMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE, LUDHINA

In the result, whereas the assessee's appeal in ITA

ITA 1375/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 May 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)

disallowed the accumulation holding the purpose stated was vague and thus the benefit of Section 11(2) of the Act was denied. Reliance in this regard was placed by the learned Assessing Officer on the decision of the Calcutta High Court rendered in the case of DIT(Exemption) v. Trustees of Singhania Charitable Trust [1993] 199

SIR AUROBINDO SOCIO ECONOMIC & MANAGEMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C-1 (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, whereas the assessee's appeal in ITA

ITA 1348/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 May 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)

disallowed the accumulation holding the purpose stated was vague and thus the benefit of Section 11(2) of the Act was denied. Reliance in this regard was placed by the learned Assessing Officer on the decision of the Calcutta High Court rendered in the case of DIT(Exemption) v. Trustees of Singhania Charitable Trust [1993] 199

SCOTT EDIL PHARMACIA LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 832/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Mar 2025AY 2016-17
Section 127Section 153D

199(Delhi) has held in para 21 of the judgement as follows:\n“ 21. A plain reading of Section 132 (4) of the Act indicates that the authorized officer is\nempowered to examine on oath any person who is found in possession or control of any\nbooks of accounts, documents, money, bullion, jewellery or any other valuable article or\nthing

SCOTT EDIL ADVANCE RESEARCH LABORATORIES AND EDUCATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 857/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Mar 2025AY 2016-17
Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

199(Delhi) has held in para 21 of the judgement as follows:\n“ 21. A plain reading of Section 132 (4) of the Act indicates that the authorized officer is\nempowered to examine on oath any person who is found in possession or control of any\nbooks of accounts, documents, money, bullion, jewellery or any other valuable article or\nthing

SHRI BALRAM KRISHAN,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

ITA 731/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Mar 2025AY 2017-18
Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

199(Delhi) has held in para 21 of the judgement as follows:\n“ 21. A plain reading of Section 132 (4) of the Act indicates that the authorized officer is\nempowered to examine on oath any person who is found in possession or control of any\nbooks of accounts, documents, money, bullion, jewellery or any other valuable article or\nthing

SHRI BALRAM KRISHAN,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

ITA 727/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Mar 2025AY 2013-14
Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

Disallowance of 80IC on subsidy claimed in ITR.\nIssue 18 : Jewellery found at House no 2273, Sector 21C, Chandigarh & Locker no\n64, Bank of India, Sector 35, Chandigarh during the search

SHRI BALRAM KRISHAN,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

ITA 729/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Mar 2025AY 2015-16
Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

Disallowance of 80IC on subsidy claimed in ITR.\nIssue 18 : Jewellery found at House no 2273, Sector 21C, Chandigarh & Locker no\n64, Bank of India, Sector 35, Chandigarh during the search.\n20\nIssue 19: Approval u/s 153D.\n4. Since common and identical issues are involved in most of the\ncaptioned appeals, hence we deem it appropriate to adjudicate the\nmatter

SANJEEV AGGARWAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , CHANDIGARH

ITA 489/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Mar 2025AY 2017-18
Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

199(Delhi) has held in para 21 of the judgement as follows:\n“ 21. A plain reading of Section 132 (4) of the Act indicates that the authorized officer is\nempowered to examine on oath any person who is found in possession or control of any\nbooks of accounts, documents, money, bullion, jewellery or any other valuable article or\nthing

SANJEEV AGGARWAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 480/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Mar 2025AY 2018-19
Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

Disallowance of 80IC on subsidy claimed in ITR.\nIssue 18 : Jewellery found at House no 2273, Sector 21C, Chandigarh & Locker no\n64, Bank of India, Sector 35, Chandigarh during the search.\n21\nIssue 19: Approval u/s 153D.\n4. Since common and identical issues are involved in most of the\ncaptioned appeals, hence we deem it appropriate to adjudicate the\nmatter

MAXPORT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

ITA 583/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Mar 2025AY 2015-16
Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

199(Delhi) has held in para 21 of the judgement as follows:\n“ 21. A plain reading of Section 132 (4) of the Act indicates that the authorized officer is\nempowered to examine on oath any person who is found in possession or control of any\nbooks of accounts, documents, money, bullion, jewellery or any other valuable article or\nthing

DCIT, CC 1, CHANDIGARH , CHANDIGARH vs. SANJEEV AGGARWAL , CHANDIGARH

The appeals of the revenue are treated as dismissed

ITA 505/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Mar 2025AY 2017-18
Section 127Section 153D

199(Delhi) has held in para 21 of the judgement as follows:\n“ 21. A plain reading of Section 132 (4) of the Act indicates that the authorized officer is\nempowered to examine on oath any person who is found in possession or control of any\nbooks of accounts, documents, money, bullion, jewellery or any other valuable article or\nthing

SHRI BALRAM KRISHAN,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

ITA 728/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Mar 2025AY 2014-15
Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

199(Delhi) has held in para 21 of the judgement as follows:\n“ 21. A plain reading of Section 132 (4) of the Act indicates that the authorized officer is\nempowered to examine on oath any person who is found in possession or control of any\nbooks of accounts, documents, money, bullion, jewellery or any other valuable article or\nthing