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.

438 results for “disallowance”+ Section 11(1)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai10,035Delhi8,481Bangalore3,268Chennai2,702Kolkata2,612Ahmedabad2,056Pune1,430Jaipur1,376Hyderabad1,118Chandigarh798Indore682Surat587Cochin438Raipur431Visakhapatnam373Amritsar333Rajkot299Karnataka299Cuttack285Lucknow220Nagpur216Panaji150Agra136Jodhpur129Guwahati113SC98Telangana85Allahabad84Ranchi73Calcutta68Dehradun58Kerala43Patna36Varanasi36Jabalpur27Punjab & Haryana12Rajasthan8Orissa7Himachal Pradesh6A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN4A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Gauhati1Uttarakhand1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 80P125Section 14A122Deduction56Disallowance50Section 143(3)40Section 80P(2)(a)40Section 25035Section 26334Section 54F26Section 154

M/S POPULAR FINANCE COMPANY,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CIR-1,, THIRUVALLA

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

ITA 202/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

c) of section 30, section 31 and sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 32 and subject to the provisions of section 38; (iia) in the case of income in the nature of family pension, a deduction of a sum equal to thirty-three and one-third per cent of such income or fifteen thousand rupees, whichever is less, Explanation

M/S.POPULAR FINANCE,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, THIRUVALLA

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

Showing 1–20 of 438 · Page 1 of 22

...
26
Addition to Income26
Exemption22
ITA 203/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

c) of section 30, section 31 and sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 32 and subject to the provisions of section 38; (iia) in the case of income in the nature of family pension, a deduction of a sum equal to thirty-three and one-third per cent of such income or fifteen thousand rupees, whichever is less, Explanation

M/S POPULAR FINANCE COMPANY,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CIR-1,, THIRUVALLA

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

ITA 204/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

c) of section 30, section 31 and sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 32 and subject to the provisions of section 38; (iia) in the case of income in the nature of family pension, a deduction of a sum equal to thirty-three and one-third per cent of such income or fifteen thousand rupees, whichever is less, Explanation

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, PATHANAMTHITTA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 69/COCH/2018[2002-03]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

c) of section 30, section 31 and sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 32 and subject to the provisions of section 38; I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 (iia) in the case of income in the nature of family pension, a deduction of a sum equal to thirty-three and one-third per cent of such income

THE ACIT, THIRUVALLA vs. M/S.MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 75/COCH/2018[2005-06]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

c) of section 30, section 31 and sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 32 and subject to the provisions of section 38; I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 (iia) in the case of income in the nature of family pension, a deduction of a sum equal to thirty-three and one-third per cent of such income

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 70/COCH/2018[2003-04]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

c) of section 30, section 31 and sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 32 and subject to the provisions of section 38; I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 (iia) in the case of income in the nature of family pension, a deduction of a sum equal to thirty-three and one-third per cent of such income

THE ACIT, THIRUVALLA vs. M/S.MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 73/COCH/2018[2002-03]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

c) of section 30, section 31 and sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 32 and subject to the provisions of section 38; I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 (iia) in the case of income in the nature of family pension, a deduction of a sum equal to thirty-three and one-third per cent of such income

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS,, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 74/COCH/2018[2003-04]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

c) of section 30, section 31 and sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 32 and subject to the provisions of section 38; I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 (iia) in the case of income in the nature of family pension, a deduction of a sum equal to thirty-three and one-third per cent of such income

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 72/COCH/2018[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

c) of section 30, section 31 and sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 32 and subject to the provisions of section 38; I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 (iia) in the case of income in the nature of family pension, a deduction of a sum equal to thirty-three and one-third per cent of such income

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 71/COCH/2018[2004-05]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

c) of section 30, section 31 and sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 32 and subject to the provisions of section 38; I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 (iia) in the case of income in the nature of family pension, a deduction of a sum equal to thirty-three and one-third per cent of such income

AYUR GREEN AYURVEDA HOSPITALS PRIVATE LIMITED,MALAPPURAM vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 565/COCH/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Mar 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmiayurgreen Ayurveda Hospsitals Vs Dcit, Private Limited Cpc, Door No. 1/301 Ayurgreen Bengaluru. Ayurveda Hospitals, Kaladi Mlp Edappal, Malappuram-679585. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaica 4294 M

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2Section 30Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

c) is used in entirely different senses, in the relevant deduction clauses. The differentiation is also evident from the fact that each of these contributions is separately dealt with in different clauses of Section 36 (1). All these establish that Parliament, while introducing Section 36(1)(va) along with Section 2(24)(x), was aware of the distinction between

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 261/COCH/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec Education society vs. ACIT (354 ITR 605) (AP) 3) CIT vs. Kamala Town

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 257/COCH/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec Education society vs. ACIT (354 ITR 605) (AP) 3) CIT vs. Kamala Town

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 255/COCH/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec Education society vs. ACIT (354 ITR 605) (AP) 3) CIT vs. Kamala Town

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 260/COCH/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec Education society vs. ACIT (354 ITR 605) (AP) 3) CIT vs. Kamala Town

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 256/COCH/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec Education society vs. ACIT (354 ITR 605) (AP) 3) CIT vs. Kamala Town

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 258/COCH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec Education society vs. ACIT (354 ITR 605) (AP) 3) CIT vs. Kamala Town

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 259/COCH/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec Education society vs. ACIT (354 ITR 605) (AP) 3) CIT vs. Kamala Town

AROOR CO-OP URBAN SOCIETY LTD,KOZHIKKODE vs. ITO, KOZHIKKODE

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

ITA 188/COCH/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shrigeorge George K.And Shrilaxmi Prasad Sahuaroor Co-Operative Urbn Society Dcit, Central Prossing Centre Aroor P.O., Kakkattil 673507 Bangalore Vs.

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Narayanan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80P

c) Intimation/order u/s 143(1) was passed on 16.03.2018 assessing Total Income at Rs.11,36,060/-. The deduction claimed u/s 80P of Rs.4,21,117/- was allowed. The 'Exempt Income' claimed of Rs.11,36,060/- was disallowed and adjustment/addition was made in the order intimation u/s 143( 1) of the Act. 3 Aroor Co-Operative Urbn Society d) The submissions

MR.THOMAS DANIEL,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 68/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.68/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15

Section 194ASection 40Section 44A

1) and the proviso. 6. This was not the claim made by the assessee before the Assessing Officer. The claim was on a different stand, initially reflecting the amounts as loan in the account books though shown as freight charges in the returns and later explained that it was not the loan amount but freight charges. It was never