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.

20 results for “disallowance”+ Section 928clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai296Delhi178Bangalore78Ahmedabad75Kolkata62Chennai46Hyderabad37Chandigarh20Jaipur19Pune15Cuttack9Indore8Cochin7Surat7Jodhpur6Visakhapatnam5Guwahati5Panaji4Karnataka3Amritsar3Rajkot3Lucknow2Ranchi2Nagpur2Patna1Punjab & Haryana1Telangana1Raipur1SC1

Key Topics

Section 14A38Section 143(3)16Section 26316Section 80I15Section 250(6)13Section 36(1)(iii)10Disallowance10Section 2538Section 246A8

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 796/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

Addition to Income7
Deduction6
Depreciation2

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 795/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, FOCAL POINT

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 84/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4,, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 794/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, , AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 817/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, - vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LTD, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 818/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 177/CHANDI/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

DCIT CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LTD, LUDHIANA

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 748/CHANDI/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

928/- Rs. 20,63,094/- perks and contribution 2. Commission to director Rs. 370,00,000/- Rs. 100,00,000/- 3. Director's meeting fee Rs. 1,55,000/- - 4. Director's traveling exp. Rs. 76,18,403/- Rs, 7,62,965/- Auditor's Remuneration 5. For Statutory Audit

M/S NAHAR INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-7, LUDHIANA

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

ITA 262/CHANDI/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L Negiआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos. 262/Chd/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 20112-13 बनाम M/S Nahar Industrial The Acit, Enterprises, Focal Point, Circle-7, Aayakar Bhawan, Ludhiana. Rishi Nagar, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaccn3563A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Hearing Through Video Conferencing "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Navdeep Sharma, Adv. राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sh. Sandeep Dhaiya, Cit Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04.05.2021 उदघोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.07.2021 आदेश/Order Per R.L. Negi:

For Appellant: Shri Navdeep Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Dhaiya, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 8D

section 14A. However, as observed above, in the case in hand, the Assessing officer has not followed the guidelines of objective satisfaction as laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of ‘Godrej & Boyce’ (supra) while making the disallowance. Neither the Assessing Officer nor the Ld. CIT(A) has pointed out any defect in the working

NAHAR SPINNING MILLS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2014-

ITA 1160/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L. Negiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1160/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Navdeep Sharma, Advocate
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

section 14A. However, as 9 Assessment year 2014-15 observed above, in the case in hand, the Assessing officer has not followed the guidelines of objective satisfaction as laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of ‘Godrej & Boyce’ (supra) while making the disallowance. Neither the Assessing Officer nor the Ld. CIT(A) has pointed

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

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 485/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.484 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chanderkanta, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 80I

section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D and making disallowance thereunder ignoring the contentions/submissions of the assessee. ITA Nos.611 to 613/Chd/2019 A.Ys. 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2013-14 3. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of AO for treating interest received amounting to Rs.9

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

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 611/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.484 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chanderkanta, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 80I

section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D and making disallowance thereunder ignoring the contentions/submissions of the assessee. ITA Nos.611 to 613/Chd/2019 A.Ys. 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2013-14 3. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of AO for treating interest received amounting to Rs.9

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

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 484/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.484 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chanderkanta, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 80I

section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D and making disallowance thereunder ignoring the contentions/submissions of the assessee. ITA Nos.611 to 613/Chd/2019 A.Ys. 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2013-14 3. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of AO for treating interest received amounting to Rs.9

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

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 612/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.484 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chanderkanta, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 80I

section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D and making disallowance thereunder ignoring the contentions/submissions of the assessee. ITA Nos.611 to 613/Chd/2019 A.Ys. 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2013-14 3. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of AO for treating interest received amounting to Rs.9

DCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA vs. VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD., LUDHIANA

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 613/CHANDI/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.484 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chanderkanta, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 80I

section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D and making disallowance thereunder ignoring the contentions/submissions of the assessee. ITA Nos.611 to 613/Chd/2019 A.Ys. 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2013-14 3. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of AO for treating interest received amounting to Rs.9

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. WARYAM STEEL CASTING PRIVATE LIMITED, KANGANWAL ROAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 757/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Muskan Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 148Section 250

Section 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained expenditure (Bogus purchases) - Assessment year 2010-11 - Where Assessing Officer had accepted sales corresponding to bogus purchases, addition of 5 per cent of alleged bogus purchases was made to income of assessee. Income-tax Officer 24(1)(4) v. Deepak Khusaldas Mehta [2017] 83 taxmann.com 63 (Mumbai - Trib.) (xvii) Factum

WARYAM STEEL CASTINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 715/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Muskan Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 148Section 250

Section 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained expenditure (Bogus purchases) - Assessment year 2010-11 - Where Assessing Officer had accepted sales corresponding to bogus purchases, addition of 5 per cent of alleged bogus purchases was made to income of assessee. Income-tax Officer 24(1)(4) v. Deepak Khusaldas Mehta [2017] 83 taxmann.com 63 (Mumbai - Trib.) (xvii) Factum

NAHAR POLY FILMS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1415/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L Negiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1414 & 1415/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Nahar Poly Films Limited, The Acit, बनाम 376, Industrial Area, Circle 7, Aaykar Bhawan, Ludhiana Rishi Nagar, Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacn5708K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Navdeep Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 155JSection 36(1)(iii)

section 14A. However, as observed above, in the case in hand, the Assessing officer has not followed the guidelines of objective satisfaction as laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of ‘Godrej & Boyce’ (supra) while making the disallowance. Neither the Assessing Officer nor the Ld. CIT(A) has pointed out any defect in the working

NAHAR POLY FILMS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1414/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L Negiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1414 & 1415/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Nahar Poly Films Limited, The Acit, बनाम 376, Industrial Area, Circle 7, Aaykar Bhawan, Ludhiana Rishi Nagar, Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacn5708K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Navdeep Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 155JSection 36(1)(iii)

section 14A. However, as observed above, in the case in hand, the Assessing officer has not followed the guidelines of objective satisfaction as laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of ‘Godrej & Boyce’ (supra) while making the disallowance. Neither the Assessing Officer nor the Ld. CIT(A) has pointed out any defect in the working

ACIT, CIRCLE 5(1),, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S VENUS REMEDIES LTD.,, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 742/CHANDI/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.742/Chandi/2009 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Acit Circle 5(1) M/S Venus Remedies Ltd. बनाम/ Vs. Sco 40-41, Sector 17-A Sco 39, Sector – 26 Chandigarh – 160017 Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacv-6524-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca), Sh. Jaspal Sharma (Advocate)&Ms. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) – By Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Yamini (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.03.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Appeal For Assessment Year (Ay) 2006-07 Has Come Up For Hearing Before Us Pursuant To The Directions Of Hon’Ble Punjab & Haryana High Court In Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.81-2012 Dated 25-07-2024 Wherein Following Substantial Questions Of Law Were Determined: - 1. Weather On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Hon’Ble Itat Was Right In Upholding The Decision Of Ld. Cit(A) Who Directed The Ao To Reallocate The Expenses On Sales Ratio & To Reduce The Addition To Rs.142.24 Lacs As Against The Addition Of Rs.7,61,96,306/- On Account Of Unexplained Expenditure U/S 69C?

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA), Sh. Jaspal SharmaFor Respondent: Sh. Yamini (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 35(2)Section 4Section 69CSection 80I

disallowance u/s 80IC amounting to Rs.8,76,27,511/- was allowed? 3. Weather the Hon’ble ITAT was right in law in accepting CIT(A)’s method of not apportioning part of expenditure relating to the financial costs of Rs.1,93,15,643/-, Depreciation of Rs.1,63,04,928/-, Capital Expenditure on R&D u/s 35(2) of Rs.3