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.

287 results for “disallowance”+ Section 79clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,565Delhi2,913Bangalore1,158Chennai970Kolkata785Ahmedabad771Hyderabad418Jaipur413Pune412Indore364Chandigarh287Surat253Cochin179Visakhapatnam161Cuttack149Raipur143Rajkot129Lucknow84Nagpur84Amritsar82Karnataka78Allahabad52Guwahati51Calcutta46Ranchi38Agra34Jodhpur31Patna30Dehradun22Panaji21SC17Jabalpur15Varanasi15Telangana14Rajasthan4Punjab & Haryana3Kerala2Uttarakhand1Orissa1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)43Addition to Income39Section 26335Section 80I26Deduction26Section 14A25Section 1120Section 250(6)19Natural Justice19

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

disallowance, along with Rs.\n1,78,314/-under Section 14A, to the revised returned income of\nRs.14,69,49,564/-, resulting in a total income of Rs.14,79

Showing 1–20 of 287 · Page 1 of 15

...
Section 12A18
Section 153A17
Disallowance15

M/S HARYANA STATE INDUSTRIAL & INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPN.,,PANCHKULA vs. ACIT,, PANCHKULA

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are

ITA 275/CHANDI/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: The Itat. That In The First Round The Itat Had Held The Provisions Of Section 14A Of The Act, For The Purposes Of Disallowing Expenses Relating To Exempt Income, Applicable In The Facts Of The Present Cases On Noting That The Assessee Had Earned Exempt Income In The Form

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Meenakshi Vohra, Addl.CIT
Section 14ASection 250(6)

section 14A of the Act and as per law. That subsequently the AO, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee, had worked out the disallowance by applying the mathematical formula provided in Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rule, 1962 for the said purpose, making disallowance of expenses for the impugned assessment years as under: Asstt. Year Disallowance

ITO, WARD, PALAMPUR vs. THE KANGRA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, KANGRA

In the result, appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 583/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Us Is Filed Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, As Amended From Time To Time. The Respondent Is A Cooperative Bank.

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 14ASection 250Section 253

disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 is legally sustainable in the wake of clarificatory Explanation, inserted by the Finance Act, 2022, to be read in to the main provision and applicable w.e.f. the date the main provision was inserted? vii), It is prayed that the order

M/S BARNALA BUILDERS AND CONSULTANT,ZIRAKPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT (CEN)-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 274/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 May 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

79,00,220/- on 06/10/2018. The return was processed by the CPC and order under section 143(1) dt. 19/11/2019 was passed wherein the disallowance

M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 187/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate and Shri Pankaj Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 80I

disallowance is warranted under section 14A of the Act on the ground that separate account were not maintained by the assessee for investment and other expenditure incurred for earning tax free investment. 14.6 Then, the assessee itself allocated an amount of Rs. 9,79

DCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA vs. M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LIMITED, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 260/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate and Shri Pankaj Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 80I

disallowance is warranted under section 14A of the Act on the ground that separate account were not maintained by the assessee for investment and other expenditure incurred for earning tax free investment. 14.6 Then, the assessee itself allocated an amount of Rs. 9,79

M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 486/CHANDI/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate and Shri Pankaj Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 80I

disallowance is warranted under section 14A of the Act on the ground that separate account were not maintained by the assessee for investment and other expenditure incurred for earning tax free investment. 14.6 Then, the assessee itself allocated an amount of Rs. 9,79

ACIT,CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA vs. M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 117/CHANDI/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate and Shri Pankaj Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 80I

disallowance is warranted under section 14A of the Act on the ground that separate account were not maintained by the assessee for investment and other expenditure incurred for earning tax free investment. 14.6 Then, the assessee itself allocated an amount of Rs. 9,79

VARDHMAN TEXTILES LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT-CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 61/CHANDI/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate and Shri Pankaj Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 80I

disallowance is warranted under section 14A of the Act on the ground that separate account were not maintained by the assessee for investment and other expenditure incurred for earning tax free investment. 14.6 Then, the assessee itself allocated an amount of Rs. 9,79

ACIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA vs. M/S HARYANA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD., PANCHKULA

In the result, we upheld the

ITA 1458/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Harish Nayyar C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 194ASection 36Section 40

section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act vide order dt. 31/12/2023 wherein the reassessed income was determined at Rs. 2,54,79,04,707/- as against original assessed income of Rs. 1,56,95,34,890/-. The assessee thereafter carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has since deleted the said addition and against

M/S METALMAN AUTO PVT. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ADDL. CIT, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 935/CHANDI/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptam/S Metalman Auto Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Addl.C.I.T., E-127, Phase-V, Range-1, Focal Point, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. Pan: Aabcm5441M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Amarjit Kamboj, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gulshan Raj, CIT(DR)
Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

79,063/-. The assessee was asked to show cause as to why this expenditure be not disallowed in view of the provisions of section

SH RAMESH KUMAR DUDANI,MOHALI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -6(1), MOHALI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 589/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 589/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2015-16 Shri Ramesh Dudani, The Dcit, बनाम C-104, Industrial Area, Circle 6(1), Live Phase Vii, Stock Complex, Mohali -160055 Sector 68, Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Abbpd0633J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Nalin K Nohria, CA and Shri B.K. Nohria, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr DR
Section 143(1)Section 14A

disallowance under section 14A of the Act was concerned, the AO had proceeded on an entirely 5 589-c-2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) – Ramesh Dudani, Mohali wrong appreciation of facts in as much as the assessee had not shown any investments in the books of account the business. He referred to the Balance Sheet of the proprietorship concern placed

ACIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S AVON CYCLES LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is

ITA 195/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms.Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe A.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Avon Cycles Ltd., Circle-5, G.T. Road, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. Pan: Aabca4140R & C.O.No.6/Chd/2016 In M/S Avon Cycles Ltd., Vs. The A.C.I.T., G.T. Road, Circle-5, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. Pan: Aabca4140R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Akhilelsh Gupta, Addl.CIT
Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(iii)

disallowance of interest under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act on account of the same was warranted having been decided in the preceding years itself in favour of the assessee. As for the investment made in the impugned year amounting to Rs.1.21 crores, the Ld. counsel for the assessee stated that it had enough own funds for making

SH. JASDEV SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO-WARD-5(5), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 214/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 214/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sh. Jasdev Singh, The Ito, बनाम 234, Sector 46A Ward 5(5), Chandigarh 160046 Chandigarh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

79,534/-/- made by the A.O. on account of late payments towards ESI and EPF under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the ‘Act’), however, before furnishing the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. When the matter was taken to the Ld. CIT(A) the said disallowance

M/S CONTINENTAL ENGINEERING & POWER PVT.LTD.,MOHALI vs. ADIT,CPC/ACIT,CIRCLE-6(1), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 212/CHANDI/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Dec 2021AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Anil Batra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance of the expenditure of Rs. 2,79,560/- (Rs. 85,458/- ESI and Rs. 1,94,102/- EPF totaling Rs. 2,79,560/-) claimed on account of deposit in EPF/ESI as employees share while processing of return under section

DCIT-CC-III, LUDHIANA vs. M/S LAXMI ENERGY & FOODS LTD.,, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 33/CHANDI/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 33/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Dcit, Vs. M/S Laxmi Energy & Foods बनाम Ltd., Central Circle-Iii, Sco 18-19, Sector 9-D, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacl3147J अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Hybrid Mode ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.07.2024 आदेश/Order Per Dr. Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 14A

Disallowance as per provisions of Section 14A of the Act. 1. Total investments made amounting to Rs.61,32,54,169/- . 2. The Assessing Officer has made total addition of Rs.3,79

M/S GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 532/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jul 2021AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

79,000/- is allowed. Ground No.1 raised by the assessee is allowed. 7. Ground No.2 raised by the assessee reads as under: “2. That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 1/3rd 8,94,33,333, being of the expenditure on advertisement and promotion of Rs.26

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 total income of the assessee. 25. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) and furnished the written submission which had been incorporated in para 11.1 of the impugned order, for the cost of repetition the same is not reproduced herein. 25.1 The Ld. CIT(A) forwarded the written submissions

IND SWIFT LABORATORIES LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated

ITA 350/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri T.N.Singla, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 250Section 35Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(i)Section 35(2)

Section 43(4), ‘Scientific Research’ means any activities for the extension of ITA 350/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 78 knowledge in the fields of natural or applied science including agriculture, animal husbandry or fisheries; that ‘expenditure incurred on scientific research’ includes all expenditure incurred for the prosecution or provision of facilities for the prosecution of scientific research, but do not include

SH. JAI TEG SINGH,MOHALI vs. ITO, MOHALI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 750/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptashri Jai Teg Singh, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, # 2431, Sector 79, Ward-6(2), Mohali. Mohali. Pan: Arjps5960R

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Bhasin, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Chanderkanta, Addl.CIT, DR
Section 40A(3)

79, Ward-6(2), Mohali. Mohali. PAN: ARJPS5960R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S.K.Bhasin, CA Respondent by : Smt.Chanderkanta, Addl.CIT, DR Date of hearing : 17.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 17.07.2018 ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M. : This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chandigarh dated 16.3.2017 relating to assessment year