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.

73 results for “disallowance”+ Section 112clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,228Mumbai1,142Bangalore433Chennai242Kolkata177Jaipur163Ahmedabad147Hyderabad80Chandigarh79Cochin73Indore60Raipur59Surat54Pune46Rajkot40Amritsar38Calcutta37Lucknow24Visakhapatnam24Karnataka23Guwahati22Agra17Jodhpur13Cuttack13Nagpur10Panaji8Telangana8Patna8SC7Allahabad5Dehradun2Rajasthan2Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 250117Section 143(3)32Section 14A25Addition to Income10Disallowance9Section 80P7Section 87A6Natural Justice6Section 92C5Exemption

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 400/COCH/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

Section 14A r.w.Rule 8D and made disallowance of expenditure to the tune of Rs.1,83,55,106/- which stood added to the income of the assesse vide assessment order dated 26.03.2014 passed by AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act for ay: 2010-11, the working of which is as hereunder: “4.3 Accordingly, the disallowance u/s 14A read with

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

Showing 1–20 of 73 · Page 1 of 4

5
Section 10(4)(ii)4
Section 10(34)3

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 404/COCH/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

Section 14A r.w.Rule 8D and made disallowance of expenditure to the tune of Rs.1,83,55,106/- which stood added to the income of the assesse vide assessment order dated 26.03.2014 passed by AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act for ay: 2010-11, the working of which is as hereunder: “4.3 Accordingly, the disallowance u/s 14A read with

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 402/COCH/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

Section 14A r.w.Rule 8D and made disallowance of expenditure to the tune of Rs.1,83,55,106/- which stood added to the income of the assesse vide assessment order dated 26.03.2014 passed by AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act for ay: 2010-11, the working of which is as hereunder: “4.3 Accordingly, the disallowance u/s 14A read with

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 403/COCH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

Section 14A r.w.Rule 8D and made disallowance of expenditure to the tune of Rs.1,83,55,106/- which stood added to the income of the assesse vide assessment order dated 26.03.2014 passed by AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act for ay: 2010-11, the working of which is as hereunder: “4.3 Accordingly, the disallowance u/s 14A read with

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ERNAKULAM

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 401/COCH/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

Section 14A r.w.Rule 8D and made disallowance of expenditure to the tune of Rs.1,83,55,106/- which stood added to the income of the assesse vide assessment order dated 26.03.2014 passed by AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act for ay: 2010-11, the working of which is as hereunder: “4.3 Accordingly, the disallowance u/s 14A read with

CONDIS INDIA HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals ITA Nos

ITA 354/COCH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Rajakannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R
Section 10(34)Section 139Section 14A

section 14A r.w. rule 8D corresponding to such exempted income. Thus, the AO invoked the provisions of s. 14 r.w. rule 8D and made disallowance of Rs. 60,65,112

CONDIS INDIA HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals ITA Nos

ITA 355/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Rajakannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R
Section 10(34)Section 139Section 14A

section 14A r.w. rule 8D corresponding to such exempted income. Thus, the AO invoked the provisions of s. 14 r.w. rule 8D and made disallowance of Rs. 60,65,112

CONDIS INDIA HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals ITA Nos

ITA 356/COCH/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Rajakannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R
Section 10(34)Section 139Section 14A

section 14A r.w. rule 8D corresponding to such exempted income. Thus, the AO invoked the provisions of s. 14 r.w. rule 8D and made disallowance of Rs. 60,65,112

THE ERNAKULAM URBAN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT, ERNAKULAM

ITA 112/COCH/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: --- None---For Respondent: Smt.V.Swarnalatha, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowance has been rightly made in assessee’s hand. 3. We notice in this background that the very issue stands adjudicated in Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court’s recent decision in ITA No. 323 of 2019 in the case of PCIT v. Peroorkada Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. [2022] 442 ITR 141 (Ker) wherein their Lordships have rejected the Revenue

MARIA JOHN,WAYANAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, KALPETTA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 400/COCH/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2024-25 Maria John .......... Appellant Nooranal, Sultan Bathery, Chungam, Wayanad. [Pan: Fadpm 3434 G] Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Kalpetta .......... Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. DR
Section 112Section 143(1)Section 87Section 87A

disallowing rebate u/s. 87A of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the CPC by holding that rebate u/s. 87A was not allowable in respect of income declared on long term capital gain by making reference to the provisions of section 112

KUNDOLY KRISHNANKUTTY SUNIL,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 2(1), THRISSUR

ITA 547/COCH/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Sept 2025AY 2016-2017
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54FSection 80C

112\nThe assessee produced the detailed bill of the expenses as\nevidence. On verification of the bills it is seen that the major\nexpenses are for\nExpense\nParty\nAmount\nSofa upholstery\nSree Muruga\n33,500\nSpilt A/C\nMerzecool\n58,050\nModular Kitchen\nSunCity\n5,99,700\nWardrobes\nSunCity\n4,50,000\nBath room Shower\n94,000\nHouse warming Party

ZACHARIA VARUGHESE,KOTTAYAM vs. ITO WARD 5, KOTTAYAM

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 131/COCH/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Thomas Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Leena Lal, Sr. DR
Section 10(4)Section 10(4)(ii)Section 143(3)Section 255(4)Section 69

112 and therefore he allowed these grounds. 6. The ld. AM differed from the views of the ld. JM and relying on the decision of the Chennai Bench in 111 taxmann.com 508 in the case of Baba Shankar Rajesh v. ACIT held that assessee is not entitled to such exemption with respect to the interest earned from the NRE Account

KAKKOTTAKATH NADUVILAPURAYIL JUNAID,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 500/COCH/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming

KAKKOTTAKATH NADUVILAPURAYIL JUNAID,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 499/COCH/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming

ABC BUILDWARES INDIA(P) LIMITED,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 454/COCH/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming

KAKKOTTAKATH NADUVILAPURAYIL JUNAID,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 498/COCH/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming

KAKKOTTAKATH NADUVILAPURAYIL JUNAID,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 497/COCH/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming

BATHX BATHWARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHIN vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 436/COCH/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming

RUCHIT PARIMAL ASHAR,SANALA ROAD, MORBI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 505/COCH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming

ABC SALES CORPORATION,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 458/COCH/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming