Search: disallowance | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

6,579 results for “disallowance”+ Section 2clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai22,685 Delhi17,116 Chennai6,579 Kolkata6,166 Bangalore5,807 Ahmedabad2,801 Pune2,322 Hyderabad2,106 Jaipur1,523 Surat1,204 Indore974 Chandigarh972 Cochin816 Karnataka795 Raipur659 Rajkot627 Visakhapatnam559 Nagpur504 Lucknow472 Amritsar440 Cuttack407 Panaji286 Agra229 Telangana225 Jodhpur223 Calcutta213 Patna193 Guwahati187 Ranchi187 Dehradun155 SC153 Allahabad109 Jabalpur107 Kerala76 Varanasi59 Punjab & Haryana41 Orissa20 Rajasthan11 Himachal Pradesh8 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN7 Gauhati2 Andhra Pradesh2 Uttarakhand2 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1 RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 J&K1 Tripura1 D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1 Bombay1 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)85 Section 14A64 Disallowance59 Addition to Income57 Section 10A44 Section 26343 Deduction39 Section 4032 Section 143(1)31 Section 80I

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1664/CHNY/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1665/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

Showing 1–20 of 6,579 · Page 1 of 329

...

22

Natural Justice21

Section 36(1)(va)18

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1663/CHNY/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2371/CHNY/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1622/CHNY/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1623/CHNY/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1662/CHNY/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1667/CHNY/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1624/CHNY/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1625/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1627/CHNY/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1619/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Cholamandalam Ms General Income Tax, V. Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, No.2, The Assistant Commissioner Of Nsc Bose Road, Income Tax. Chennai - 600 001. Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai - 600 101. Pan : Aabcc 6633 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2372/CHNY/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Cholamandalam Ms General Income Tax, V. Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, No.2, The Assistant Commissioner Of Nsc Bose Road, Income Tax. Chennai - 600 001. Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai - 600 101. Pan : Aabcc 6633 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1675/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Cholamandalam Ms General Income Tax, V. Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, No.2, The Assistant Commissioner Of Nsc Bose Road, Income Tax. Chennai - 600 001. Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai - 600 101. Pan : Aabcc 6633 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1618/CHNY/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Cholamandalam Ms General Income Tax, V. Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, No.2, The Assistant Commissioner Of Nsc Bose Road, Income Tax. Chennai - 600 001. Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai - 600 101. Pan : Aabcc 6633 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1674/CHNY/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Cholamandalam Ms General Income Tax, V. Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, No.2, The Assistant Commissioner Of Nsc Bose Road, Income Tax. Chennai - 600 001. Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai - 600 101. Pan : Aabcc 6633 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

disallowed under Section 37 of the Act since it was paid in violation of Section 2(9) of the Insurance

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1060/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act. 18. It is also contended by the assessee that under Section 14A(2

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 967/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act. 18. It is also contended by the assessee that under Section 14A(2

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 947/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act. 18. It is also contended by the assessee that under Section 14A(2

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1883/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act. 18. It is also contended by the assessee that under Section 14A(2