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.

17 results for “disallowance”+ Section 92Eclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai166Delhi106Bangalore42Kolkata28Ahmedabad19Pune18Chennai17Jaipur14Hyderabad14Indore3Varanasi2Amritsar2Chandigarh2Karnataka2Jodhpur1Jabalpur1Nagpur1Himachal Pradesh1Surat1Telangana1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 143(2)12Section 143(3)10Section 56(1)10Transfer Pricing7Addition to Income7Section 1476Section 37(1)6Reopening of Assessment6Section 253(4)

T vs. MOTOR COMPANY LTD.,CHENNAIVS.ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee ppeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 672/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.672/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S.Tvs Motor Co. Ltd., V. The Acit, No.29, Haddows Road, Corporate Circle – 3(1), Chennai-600 006. Chennai. [Pan: Aaacs 7032 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143(3)

92E "international transaction" means a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-residents, residents, in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of tangible or intangible in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of tangible or intangible in the nature of purchase

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LTD., KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

5
Section 805
Deduction5
Section 2634
ITA 614/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

92E, "international transaction'' means a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-residents, in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of tangible or intangible property, or provision of services, or lending or borrowing money, or any other transaction having a bearing on the profits, income, losses or assets of such enterprises

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. HYUNDAI MOTORS INDIA LTD., KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 761/CHNY/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2011-2012
Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

92E, "international transaction'' means a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-residents, in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of tangible or intangible property, or provision of services, or lending or borrowing money, or any other transaction having a bearing on the profits, income, losses or assets of such enterprises

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LIMITED, KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 739/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

92E, "international transaction'' means a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-residents, in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of tangible or intangible property, or provision of services, or lending or borrowing money, or any other transaction having a bearing on the profits, income, losses or assets of such enterprises

HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 563/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

92E, "international transaction'' means a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-residents, in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of tangible or intangible property, or provision of services, or lending or borrowing money, or any other transaction having a bearing on the profits, income, losses or assets of such enterprises

HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 853/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

92E, "international transaction'' means a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-residents, in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of tangible or intangible property, or provision of services, or lending or borrowing money, or any other transaction having a bearing on the profits, income, losses or assets of such enterprises

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. R K M POWERGEN PRIVATE LIMITED, T NAGAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue for the both the

ITA 800/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Nov 2024AY 2013-14
Section 56(1)

92E of the Act. The appellant filed the return of income for the AY 2010-11 to AY 2015-16 declaring total income as under:\nAsst Year Date of filing Returned Income/(Loss) Book profits u/s.\nof ROI under 115JB of the Act\nnormal\nprovisions\n2010-11 25-09-2010 (89,63,844)\n2011-12 29-11-2011 Nil\n2012

RENAULT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1078/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1078/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-2013. M/S. Renault India Private Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, No.37 & 38, Asv Ramana Corporate Circle 5(1) Towers, Chennai. 4Th Floor, Venkatnarayana Road, T.N Agar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aadcr 2042M ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 144C(5)

92E, “international transaction” means a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-residents, in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of tangible or intangible property, or provision of services, or lending or borrowing money, or any other transaction having a bearing on the profits, income, losses or assets of such enterprises

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. R K M POWERGEN PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue for the both the\n

ITA 799/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Nov 2024AY 2014-15
For Appellant: \nShri. A. Sasikumar, CITFor Respondent: \nShri. V. Ravichandran, CA
Section 56(1)

92E of the Act. The appellant filed the return of income for the AY 2010-11 to AY 2015-16 declaring total income as under:\nAsst Year\nDate of filing\nReturned\nIncome/(Loss)\nBook\nprofits u/s.\n115JB of the Act\nof ROI\nunder\nnormal\nprovisions\n2010-11\n25-09-2010\n(89,63,844)\n2011-12\n29-11-2011\nNil

K.P.R.MILL LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2 , COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1915/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1915/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ruby George, CIT

disallowed the claim of the assessee. 8. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. It is not clear from the orders of the authorities below whether the gratuity fund was created by the assessee itself or it was contributed to the LIC gratuity fund. In the absence of any details

ACIT NON CORP CIRCLE 1 (1) FORMERLY KNOWN AS BUSINESS CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S DEOLITE HASKINS & SELLS, CHENNAI

ITA 2580/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan,JCIT,D.RFor Respondent: Mr.S.P.Chidambaram,Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

disallowance of pension paid to the retired partners. ITA Nos.2578 to 2580/chny/2017 :- 9 -: C.O.Nos.47to 49/Chny/2018 M/s.Deloittee Haskins & Sells 5. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found that a sum of 1,49,76,851/- was reduced from the gross receipts with a note that the payment was made towards the retired partners as pension on account of overriding

ACIT NON CORP CIRCLE 1 (1) FORMERLY KNOWN AS BUSINESS CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S DEOLITE HASKINS & SELLS, CHENNAI

ITA 2578/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan,JCIT,D.RFor Respondent: Mr.S.P.Chidambaram,Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

disallowance of pension paid to the retired partners. ITA Nos.2578 to 2580/chny/2017 :- 9 -: C.O.Nos.47to 49/Chny/2018 M/s.Deloittee Haskins & Sells 5. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found that a sum of 1,49,76,851/- was reduced from the gross receipts with a note that the payment was made towards the retired partners as pension on account of overriding

ACIT NON CORP CIRCLE 1 (1) FORMERLY KNOWN AS BUSINESS CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S DEOLITE HASKINS & SELLS, CHENNAI

ITA 2579/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan,JCIT,D.RFor Respondent: Mr.S.P.Chidambaram,Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

disallowance of pension paid to the retired partners. ITA Nos.2578 to 2580/chny/2017 :- 9 -: C.O.Nos.47to 49/Chny/2018 M/s.Deloittee Haskins & Sells 5. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found that a sum of 1,49,76,851/- was reduced from the gross receipts with a note that the payment was made towards the retired partners as pension on account of overriding

ACIT, MADURAI vs. ARUNA ALLOY STEELS PRIVATE LTD., MADURAI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal for assessment year

ITA 933/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3, 933 & 847/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 & 2007-08 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Aruna Alloy Steels (P) Ltd., Income Tax, V. Super B-3, Industrial Estate, Corporate Circle I, K-Pudur, Madurai – 625 007. Madurai. Pan : Aaeca 6781 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CITFor Respondent: Shri K. Ravi, Advocate
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147

92E ; (c) where an assessment has been made, but-- (ca) where a return of income has not been furnished by the assessee or a return of income has been furnished by him and on the basis of information or document received from the prescribed income-tax authority, under sub-section (2) of section 133C, it is noticed by the Assessing

ACIT, MADURAI vs. ARUNA ALLOY STEELS PRIVATE LTD., MADURAI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal for assessment year

ITA 847/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Apr 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3, 933 & 847/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 & 2007-08 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Aruna Alloy Steels (P) Ltd., Income Tax, V. Super B-3, Industrial Estate, Corporate Circle I, K-Pudur, Madurai – 625 007. Madurai. Pan : Aaeca 6781 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CITFor Respondent: Shri K. Ravi, Advocate
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147

92E ; (c) where an assessment has been made, but-- (ca) where a return of income has not been furnished by the assessee or a return of income has been furnished by him and on the basis of information or document received from the prescribed income-tax authority, under sub-section (2) of section 133C, it is noticed by the Assessing

ACIT, MADURAI vs. ARUNA ALLOY STEELS (P) LTD., MADURAI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal for assessment year

ITA 3/CHNY/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3, 933 & 847/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 & 2007-08 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Aruna Alloy Steels (P) Ltd., Income Tax, V. Super B-3, Industrial Estate, Corporate Circle I, K-Pudur, Madurai – 625 007. Madurai. Pan : Aaeca 6781 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CITFor Respondent: Shri K. Ravi, Advocate
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147

92E ; (c) where an assessment has been made, but-- (ca) where a return of income has not been furnished by the assessee or a return of income has been furnished by him and on the basis of information or document received from the prescribed income-tax authority, under sub-section (2) of section 133C, it is noticed by the Assessing

FAIVELEY TRANSPORT TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD.,HOSUR vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1598/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Ashik Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80

disallowed and added to the total income. The assessee vide letter dated 04.03.2021 submitted the following details alongwith annexures as under:- ‘’Please find below the response with regard to the abovementioned Show Cause Notice: 1. As per sub-clause (aa) of Explanation 2 of sub-section (1) of Section 139 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due date for filing