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.

5 results for “disallowance”+ Section 32Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai118Delhi83Kolkata30Bangalore28Hyderabad21Indore17Ahmedabad13Pune11SC7Chennai6Guwahati6Chandigarh5Lucknow4Jaipur3Visakhapatnam3Calcutta2Telangana2Cochin2Cuttack1Surat1Karnataka1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 36(1)(viii)14Section 1012Disallowance4Section 271(1)(c)3Deduction3Section 1542

THE STATE BANK OF INDIA,PATIALA vs. ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 861/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe State Bank Of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor Of State Bank Of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D & The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank Of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank Of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D The State Bank Of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor Of State Bank Of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D & The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank Of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D The State Bank Of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor Of State Bank Of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Kumar,CIT DR
Section 36(1)(viii)

32A of the Act at p. 896 held that section prescribes no point of time by which the reserve should be created and in this regard accepted that a reserve created after the closure of the accounts of the year qualifies by observing as under : "The second question which is raised only

ACIT, PATIALA vs. M/S THE STATE BANK OF PATIALA, PATIALA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 721/CHANDI/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Feb 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe State Bank Of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor Of State Bank Of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D & The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank Of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank Of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D The State Bank Of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor Of State Bank Of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D & The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank Of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D The State Bank Of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor Of State Bank Of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Kumar,CIT DR
Section 36(1)(viii)

32A of the Act at p. 896 held that section prescribes no point of time by which the reserve should be created and in this regard accepted that a reserve created after the closure of the accounts of the year qualifies by observing as under : "The second question which is raised only

SHRI ANIL SURI,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 127/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 127/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Anil Suri, Dcit, Circle 1(1), बनाम H.No.699, Sector 11-B, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Amcps9331C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Bhalla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudershan, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 250(6)Section 56

disallowance of claim made by the assessee u/s 10(10A)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') of Rs. 15,65,410/-. 4. The brief facts relevant to the issue are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had revised his return of income and thereby offered less income

ARUN DHIR,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 97/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 97/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Arun Dhir, Vs The Dcit, House No.1150, Sector 21-B, Circle-1, Chandigarh. Sector 17,Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aarpd0180F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pankaj Bhalla, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Bhalla, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 15Section 154

disallowed. This application has been dismissed by the AO. 4. Appeal to the CIT (Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. A.Y.2013-14 3 5. With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. It emerges out from the record that assessee was an employee of M/s Ranbaxy Laboratories and worked for 25 years. According

ASHOK KUMAR SOBTI,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-1(1), LUDHIANA

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 1006/CHANDI/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: The Cit(A).

For Appellant: Shri Vibhor GargFor Respondent: Shri Manjit Singh, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 271(1)(c)

32A, Urban Estate, Ward 1(1), Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: BTGPS8566R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Vibhor Garg राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manjit Singh, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 24.12.2018 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 21.01.2019 आदेश/ORDER