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.

22 results for “disallowance”+ Section 215clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai887Delhi706Chennai292Bangalore202Ahmedabad192Jaipur124Kolkata120Agra84Hyderabad80Chandigarh72Surat72Pune58Indore48Rajkot36Visakhapatnam35Raipur34Cochin22Amritsar20Lucknow18Cuttack17Karnataka15Jabalpur12Panaji11Jodhpur9SC8Guwahati6Dehradun5Telangana4Allahabad3Ranchi2Nagpur2Varanasi2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Rajasthan1Calcutta1Patna1Orissa1Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Addition to Income21Exemption13Section 4011Disallowance9Section 698Section 1327Section 153D6Section 1946Section 194C5Section 43B

THE ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.KUNNEL ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS P. LTD, KOCHI

ITA 653/COCH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2012-13

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

Section 43B

section 43B of the Act. Thus, this ground of appeals of the Revenue for both the assessment years is allowed. 5. The next common ground of the Revenue is with regard to disallowance of proportionate interest on borrowed funds. 5.1 The facts of the case are that for the assessment year 2012-13, the Assessing Officer found that there were

M/S AC CARGO MANAGEMENT P.LTD,,COCHIN vs. THE ITO, COCHIN

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

ITA 320/COCH/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri George George. K.] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 320/Coch/2013. िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008. Vs. M/S. Ac Cargo Management The Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd, Ward 1(1) 1St Floor, Chacko Chambers, Kochi Civil Lines Road, Palarivattom, Kochi 682 025. [Pan Aaeca 2206K] (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/Appellant) अपीलाथ" (ू"यथ" ू"यथ" ू"यथ"/Respondent) ू"यथ"

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2

5
TDS5
Depreciation5
For Appellant: Shri. R. Krishnan, C.A
Section 194Section 194CSection 194ISection 40

215 (Mum) and Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority vs. ACIT ITA No. 1637/Ahd/2010 dated 10.03.2011. Respectfully following the above, we hold that assessee has correctly deducted tax under section 194C and there is no liability to deduct tax under section 194 I as the said provisions are not applicable to the hire charges paid for utilisation of transport services from

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 220/COCH/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

disallowing the advertisement expenses for not deducting the TDS. We find that the said amount was added based on the figures found place in the books of account and not based on the incriminating materials seized during the search. Therefore, when the AO made an assessment u/s. 153C of the Act, he cannot make addition u/s. 68 or 69 since

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 221/COCH/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

disallowing the advertisement expenses for not deducting the TDS. We find that the said amount was added based on the figures found place in the books of account and not based on the incriminating materials seized during the search. Therefore, when the AO made an assessment u/s. 153C of the Act, he cannot make addition u/s. 68 or 69 since

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 223/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

disallowing the advertisement expenses for not deducting the TDS. We find that the said amount was added based on the figures found place in the books of account and not based on the incriminating materials seized during the search. Therefore, when the AO made an assessment u/s. 153C of the Act, he cannot make addition u/s. 68 or 69 since

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 222/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

disallowing the advertisement expenses for not deducting the TDS. We find that the said amount was added based on the figures found place in the books of account and not based on the incriminating materials seized during the search. Therefore, when the AO made an assessment u/s. 153C of the Act, he cannot make addition u/s. 68 or 69 since

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 47/COCH/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

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

disallowance made by the Revenue authorities was not justifiable.” 5.8 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer had made the addition in assessment year 2009-10 under ‘business head ' on the pretext that there was an 'apparent loss' of Rs. 89.76 lakhs on alleged policy of underselling in which event there was an apparent gain in the books

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 49/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

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

disallowance made by the Revenue authorities was not justifiable.” 5.8 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer had made the addition in assessment year 2009-10 under ‘business head ' on the pretext that there was an 'apparent loss' of Rs. 89.76 lakhs on alleged policy of underselling in which event there was an apparent gain in the books

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 40/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

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

disallowance made by the Revenue authorities was not justifiable.” 5.8 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer had made the addition in assessment year 2009-10 under ‘business head ' on the pretext that there was an 'apparent loss' of Rs. 89.76 lakhs on alleged policy of underselling in which event there was an apparent gain in the books

SRI.R. PRATAP,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 38/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

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

disallowance made by the Revenue authorities was not justifiable.” 5.8 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer had made the addition in assessment year 2009-10 under ‘business head ' on the pretext that there was an 'apparent loss' of Rs. 89.76 lakhs on alleged policy of underselling in which event there was an apparent gain in the books

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 41/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

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

disallowance made by the Revenue authorities was not justifiable.” 5.8 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer had made the addition in assessment year 2009-10 under ‘business head ' on the pretext that there was an 'apparent loss' of Rs. 89.76 lakhs on alleged policy of underselling in which event there was an apparent gain in the books

SMT. T.C. USHA,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 44/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

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

disallowance made by the Revenue authorities was not justifiable.” 5.8 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer had made the addition in assessment year 2009-10 under ‘business head ' on the pretext that there was an 'apparent loss' of Rs. 89.76 lakhs on alleged policy of underselling in which event there was an apparent gain in the books

SRI.K.RAVINDRANATHAN NAIR,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 46/COCH/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

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

disallowance made by the Revenue authorities was not justifiable.” 5.8 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer had made the addition in assessment year 2009-10 under ‘business head ' on the pretext that there was an 'apparent loss' of Rs. 89.76 lakhs on alleged policy of underselling in which event there was an apparent gain in the books

SRI.R. PRATAP,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 39/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

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

disallowance made by the Revenue authorities was not justifiable.” 5.8 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer had made the addition in assessment year 2009-10 under ‘business head ' on the pretext that there was an 'apparent loss' of Rs. 89.76 lakhs on alleged policy of underselling in which event there was an apparent gain in the books

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 48/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

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

disallowance made by the Revenue authorities was not justifiable.” 5.8 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer had made the addition in assessment year 2009-10 under ‘business head ' on the pretext that there was an 'apparent loss' of Rs. 89.76 lakhs on alleged policy of underselling in which event there was an apparent gain in the books

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 42/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

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

disallowance made by the Revenue authorities was not justifiable.” 5.8 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer had made the addition in assessment year 2009-10 under ‘business head ' on the pretext that there was an 'apparent loss' of Rs. 89.76 lakhs on alleged policy of underselling in which event there was an apparent gain in the books

SRI.R. PRATAP,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 37/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

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

disallowance made by the Revenue authorities was not justifiable.” 5.8 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer had made the addition in assessment year 2009-10 under ‘business head ' on the pretext that there was an 'apparent loss' of Rs. 89.76 lakhs on alleged policy of underselling in which event there was an apparent gain in the books

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 43/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

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

disallowance made by the Revenue authorities was not justifiable.” 5.8 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer had made the addition in assessment year 2009-10 under ‘business head ' on the pretext that there was an 'apparent loss' of Rs. 89.76 lakhs on alleged policy of underselling in which event there was an apparent gain in the books

SMT. T.C. USHA,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 45/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

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

disallowance made by the Revenue authorities was not justifiable.” 5.8 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer had made the addition in assessment year 2009-10 under ‘business head ' on the pretext that there was an 'apparent loss' of Rs. 89.76 lakhs on alleged policy of underselling in which event there was an apparent gain in the books

K.K.BUILDERS,KANNUR vs. DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 237/COCH/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

Disallowance of depreciation 6,26,61,743 6. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). It was contended before the CIT(A) that the assessment order passed by the AO is invalid as the JCIT had granted a mechanical approval u/sec. 153D of the Act and the additions cannot be made