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.

2 results for “disallowance”+ Section 144Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi112Mumbai87Chennai70Kolkata55Allahabad37Bangalore35Pune21Lucknow15Jaipur15Chandigarh13Patna8Surat8Raipur7Ahmedabad7Rajkot6Agra5Indore3Karnataka3Cochin2Amritsar2Jabalpur1Ranchi1Visakhapatnam1Hyderabad1

Key Topics

Section 37(1)8Section 374Section 452Section 144A2Deduction2Disallowance2

ARUN THOMAS,CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA, KERALA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE,THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 768/COCH/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Oct 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 144ASection 37Section 37(1)Section 45

disallowance represented money paid in excess of limit which was prescribed under Kerala Money lenders Act, expenditure was in teeth of Explanation to section 37(1) and was not to be allowed - Held, yes [Para 9] [In favour of revenue]" 12.0. Here, assessee is accepting deposits which is prohibited by law-section 45- S of the RBI Act. The appellant

ARUN THOMAS,CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA, KERALA vs. INCOME TAX AUTHORITY, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 769/COCH/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Oct 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 144ASection 37Section 37(1)Section 45

disallowance represented money paid in excess of limit which was prescribed under Kerala Money lenders Act, expenditure was in teeth of Explanation to section 37(1) and was not to be allowed - Held, yes [Para 9] [In favour of revenue]" 12.0. Here, assessee is accepting deposits which is prohibited by law-section 45- S of the RBI Act. The appellant