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.

10 results for “disallowance”+ Section 272A(1)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai46Bangalore27Delhi27Ahmedabad14Chandigarh11Chennai10Pune10Cuttack9Kolkata9Jaipur7Lucknow6Hyderabad5Panaji5Surat5Amritsar3Raipur3Rajkot3Nagpur2Agra2Patna2Visakhapatnam1Dehradun1Indore1Jabalpur1Jodhpur1SC1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 40A(3)10Section 80P9Penalty9Disallowance9Section 408Section 270A7Addition to Income5Deduction5Section 272(1)(d)3Section 144

SURABI EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,DINDIGUL vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, , COIMBATORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for AY 2018-19 and AY\n2020-21 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2759/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2026AY 2018-19
Section 250Section 270A

sections": ["250", "143(3)", "270A", "271AAC(1)", "272A(1)(d)", "272A(1)(c)", "69C"], "issues": "Whether the disallowances and penalties

AA 293 PANAHALLI PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,ERODE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), ERODE

In the result, the appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 2020/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2020, 2021 & 2022/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Aa 293 Panahalli Primary Agricultural Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Ward 2(1), 1, Panakkahally, Thalavady Post, Erode. Erode 638 461. [Pan: Aacaa1566A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, C.A. (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.11.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders All Dated 27.06.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Towards Disallowance Of Deduction Claimed Under Section 80P Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short], Levy Of Penalty Under Section 270A Of The Act & Levy Of Penalty Under Section 272(1)(D) Of The Act By Rejecting The Prayer Of Condonation Of Delay In Filing The Appeals Before The Ld. Cit(A).

3
Section 142(1)3
Section 683
For Appellant: Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, C.A. (Virtual)For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 144Section 270ASection 272(1)(d)Section 80P

disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80P of the Act for the reason that the assessee did not furnish any explanation/documentary evidence in support of deduction claimed at ₹.27,88,155/- under section 80P of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee since the assessee failed to explain the sufficient cause in filing the appeal

AA 293 PANAHALLI PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,ERODE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), ERODE

In the result, the appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 2021/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2020, 2021 & 2022/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Aa 293 Panahalli Primary Agricultural Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Ward 2(1), 1, Panakkahally, Thalavady Post, Erode. Erode 638 461. [Pan: Aacaa1566A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, C.A. (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.11.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders All Dated 27.06.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Towards Disallowance Of Deduction Claimed Under Section 80P Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short], Levy Of Penalty Under Section 270A Of The Act & Levy Of Penalty Under Section 272(1)(D) Of The Act By Rejecting The Prayer Of Condonation Of Delay In Filing The Appeals Before The Ld. Cit(A).

For Appellant: Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, C.A. (Virtual)For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 144Section 270ASection 272(1)(d)Section 80P

disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80P of the Act for the reason that the assessee did not furnish any explanation/documentary evidence in support of deduction claimed at ₹.27,88,155/- under section 80P of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee since the assessee failed to explain the sufficient cause in filing the appeal

AA 293 PANAHALLI PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,ERODE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), ERODE

In the result, the appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 2022/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2020, 2021 & 2022/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Aa 293 Panahalli Primary Agricultural Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Ward 2(1), 1, Panakkahally, Thalavady Post, Erode. Erode 638 461. [Pan: Aacaa1566A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, C.A. (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.11.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders All Dated 27.06.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Towards Disallowance Of Deduction Claimed Under Section 80P Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short], Levy Of Penalty Under Section 270A Of The Act & Levy Of Penalty Under Section 272(1)(D) Of The Act By Rejecting The Prayer Of Condonation Of Delay In Filing The Appeals Before The Ld. Cit(A).

For Appellant: Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, C.A. (Virtual)For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 144Section 270ASection 272(1)(d)Section 80P

disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80P of the Act for the reason that the assessee did not furnish any explanation/documentary evidence in support of deduction claimed at ₹.27,88,155/- under section 80P of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee since the assessee failed to explain the sufficient cause in filing the appeal

P.SENTHIL KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 3398/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3397 & 3398/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13. Shri. P. Senthil Kumar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, P-2, Hig Adyar Apartments, Non Corporate Ward 3(3) Kottur Gardens, Chennai. Circular Road, Kotturpuram, Chennai 600 086. [Pan Abbps 1019H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Durai Pandian, Sr. A.R
Section 271BSection 40A(3)

disallowance if any, which is needed u/s.40A(3) of ITA Nos.3397 & 3398/Mds/16 :- 6 -: the Act back to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer for consideration afresh in accordance with law. 8. Now, we take appeal of the assessee in ITA No.3398/Mds/2016. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that levy of penalty 9. u/s.271B of the Act was not warranted

P.SENTHIL KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 3397/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3397 & 3398/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13. Shri. P. Senthil Kumar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, P-2, Hig Adyar Apartments, Non Corporate Ward 3(3) Kottur Gardens, Chennai. Circular Road, Kotturpuram, Chennai 600 086. [Pan Abbps 1019H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Durai Pandian, Sr. A.R
Section 271BSection 40A(3)

disallowance if any, which is needed u/s.40A(3) of ITA Nos.3397 & 3398/Mds/16 :- 6 -: the Act back to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer for consideration afresh in accordance with law. 8. Now, we take appeal of the assessee in ITA No.3398/Mds/2016. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that levy of penalty 9. u/s.271B of the Act was not warranted

MAHALINGAM SUNDARA MOORTHY,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-4(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1682/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1682/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mahalingam Sundara Moorthy, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 602, Srithi Block, Chitra Avenue, Corporate Ward 4(1), Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. Chennai. [Pan:Afypm5382G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Rajakumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N. Rajakumar, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 272A(1)(d)Section 274Section 68

272A(1)(d) of the Act dated 30.09.2019 for non furnishing of details. The Assessing Officer issued a summon 3 I.T.A. No.1682/Chny/25 under section 131 of the Act dated 21.10.2019 requiring the assessee to appear before the Assessing Officer on 25.10.2019, but, however, assessee failed to comply with this summon and submitted partial details. The Assessing Officer again issued notices

ACIT, NAGERCOIL vs. M/S. VILAVANCODE SELF RELIANCE CREDIT SERVICES LTD., NAGERCOIL

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2651/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri M. Balaganeshआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2651/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCITFor Respondent: Sh. A.S. Sriraman, Advocate
Section 194ASection 272A(2)(f)Section 40

D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal of the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -3, Madurai, dated 13.06.2016 and pertains to assessment year 2012-13 deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. 2 I.T.A. No.2651/Mds/16 2. Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee

ACIT, NAGERCOIL vs. M/S. KRISHNAVAKA BENEFIT FUND LTD., NAGERCOIL

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue and the cross-objection filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 2653/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCITFor Respondent: Shri N. Subramonian, CA
Section 194Section 272A(2)(f)Section 40

D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal of the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -3, Madurai, dated 13.06.2016 and pertains to assessment year 2012-13 deleting the 2 I.T.A. No.2653/Mds/16 C.O. No.176/Mds/17 disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee has filed cross-objection in respect of the same

SAI TELECOM,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 3(3), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2534/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manjunatha. Gआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2534/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Sai Telecom, The Income Tax Officer, No.407, 4Th Floor, Kaveri Complex, Vs. Non Corporate Ward-3(3), Nungambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Abrfs-4178-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Arv Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.09.2023

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, C.A ""For Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 68

272A of the Act. Again the letter was received unserved with the remarks of the postman as "unclaimed". x. Accordingly, in view of the above facts of the case, vide the letter dated 16/08/2017, the appellant was confronted with the above and was asked to provide the relevant documentary evidences to establish the genuineness and correctness of the loan credit