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.

80 results for “disallowance”+ Section 220(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,006Mumbai913Bangalore293Chennai283Kolkata213Jaipur163Ahmedabad163Hyderabad113Pune102Indore90Chandigarh89Cochin80Raipur63Lucknow41Panaji37Guwahati31Surat27Nagpur24Rajkot23Patna22Visakhapatnam21Allahabad19Cuttack16Karnataka15Agra12Amritsar11Ranchi9SC8Kerala8Jodhpur6Dehradun3Telangana3Rajasthan2Varanasi1

Key Topics

Addition to Income57Section 4030Section 14A27Disallowance23Section 143(3)20Deduction19Section 220(2)17Section 15416Exemption13Section 250

THE PARAKODE SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,ADOOR vs. THE ITO,, KOLLAM

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

ITA 115/COCH/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuthe Parakode Service Co-Op. The Income Tax Officer Bank Ltd. Ward 4, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Parakode, Adoor Karbala Junction Pathanamthitta 691554 Kollam 691001 Pan – Aaajt1587B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 80ASection 80P

220 CTR (Del) 635 : (2008) 15 DTR (Del) 258 followed.” 5. The Act permits deduction under Section 80P to the primary co-operative society which has its primary objective to provide financial accommodation to its members for agricultural purposes or for purposes connected with agricultural activities. The appellant’s primary objective is to provide financial accommodation to its members

Showing 1–20 of 80 · Page 1 of 4

12
Section 244A12
Section 80P12

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

ITA 134/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Raghunathan S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri. Santham Bose, CIT-DR
Section 144C(5)Section 190Section 194JSection 234BSection 40Section 92C(3)

6. Against the above order of the Assessing Officer, the Draft Resolution Panel (DRP) has given a direction that USTIPL is rendering managerial, technical and consultancy services to the assessee by providing services of technical or other personnel. Thus the services come within purview of section 9(1)(vii) explanation 2 and provisions of section 194J are attracted in this

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

ITA 475/COCH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Raghunathan S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri. Santham Bose, CIT-DR
Section 144C(5)Section 190Section 194JSection 234BSection 40Section 92C(3)

6. Against the above order of the Assessing Officer, the Draft Resolution Panel (DRP) has given a direction that USTIPL is rendering managerial, technical and consultancy services to the assessee by providing services of technical or other personnel. Thus the services come within purview of section 9(1)(vii) explanation 2 and provisions of section 194J are attracted in this

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

6) of section 40. The income under this clause shall be adjusted to the extent of the amount not so allowed to be deducted ; " [Emphasis Supplied] From the above relevant provisions, it is evident that the interest income is assessable under section 56 of the Act only if such interest is not assessable I.T.A. No.68 /Coch/2018 under other heads

THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), THRISSUR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 232/COCH/2024[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Naresh S., CAFor Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 153Section 154Section 220(2)Section 234DSection 244ASection 244aSection 250

220(2) of the Act pertaining to the relevant previous year has to be computed on standalone basis because of the fact that even if we hold the learned Assessing Officer has not given effect to any other assessment years order by The South Indian Bank Ltd. the concerned appellate authority, would not ispo facto result in assessee’s claim

THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1)& TPS, THRISSUR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 286/COCH/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Naresh S., CAFor Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 153Section 154Section 220(2)Section 234DSection 244ASection 244aSection 250

220(2) of the Act pertaining to the relevant previous year has to be computed on standalone basis because of the fact that even if we hold the learned Assessing Officer has not given effect to any other assessment years order by The South Indian Bank Ltd. the concerned appellate authority, would not ispo facto result in assessee’s claim

THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. DCIT, THRISSUR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 288/COCH/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Naresh S., CAFor Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 153Section 154Section 220(2)Section 234DSection 244ASection 244aSection 250

220(2) of the Act pertaining to the relevant previous year has to be computed on standalone basis because of the fact that even if we hold the learned Assessing Officer has not given effect to any other assessment years order by The South Indian Bank Ltd. the concerned appellate authority, would not ispo facto result in assessee’s claim

THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED ,THRISSUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), THRISSUR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 285/COCH/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Naresh S., CAFor Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 153Section 154Section 220(2)Section 234DSection 244ASection 244aSection 250

220(2) of the Act pertaining to the relevant previous year has to be computed on standalone basis because of the fact that even if we hold the learned Assessing Officer has not given effect to any other assessment years order by The South Indian Bank Ltd. the concerned appellate authority, would not ispo facto result in assessee’s claim

THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. JCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), THRISSUR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 233/COCH/2024[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Naresh S., CAFor Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 153Section 154Section 220(2)Section 234DSection 244ASection 244aSection 250

220(2) of the Act pertaining to the relevant previous year has to be computed on standalone basis because of the fact that even if we hold the learned Assessing Officer has not given effect to any other assessment years order by The South Indian Bank Ltd. the concerned appellate authority, would not ispo facto result in assessee’s claim

THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, THRISSUR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 283/COCH/2024[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Naresh S., CAFor Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 153Section 154Section 220(2)Section 234DSection 244ASection 244aSection 250

220(2) of the Act pertaining to the relevant previous year has to be computed on standalone basis because of the fact that even if we hold the learned Assessing Officer has not given effect to any other assessment years order by The South Indian Bank Ltd. the concerned appellate authority, would not ispo facto result in assessee’s claim

M/S.THE NELLIAMPATHY TEA & PRODUCE CO.LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

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

ITA 315/COCH/2018[1994-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 May 2019AY 1994-05

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

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 220(2)Section 234DSection 23DSection 250Section 250(2)Section 80H

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer in assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act dated 27/12/1996. Consequent to the High Court order, the Assessing Officer passed an order giving effect to the order of the High Court vide order dated 01/11/2012 and raised a final demand of Rs.40,60,566/- after charging interest u/s. 220(2) and 234D

M/S.MUTHOOT BANKERS,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

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

ITA 92/COCH/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

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

Section 10Section 14A

220/- b. As on 31/03/2009 Rs.19,17,67,945/- I.T.A. Nos.92 & 93/Coch/2015 5. On appeal, the CIT(A) referred to the provisions of section 14A: 14A (1) For the purposes of computing the total income under this Chapter, no deduction shall be allowed in respect of expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income which does not for part

M/S.MUTHOOT BANKERS,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

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

ITA 93/COCH/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

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

Section 10Section 14A

220/- b. As on 31/03/2009 Rs.19,17,67,945/- I.T.A. Nos.92 & 93/Coch/2015 5. On appeal, the CIT(A) referred to the provisions of section 14A: 14A (1) For the purposes of computing the total income under this Chapter, no deduction shall be allowed in respect of expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income which does not for part

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

ITA 464/COCH/2025[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 7. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee contends that the AO, for AY 2008-09, pursuant to the remand order

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO,CIRCLE CENTRAL, TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 496/COCH/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 7. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee contends that the AO, for AY 2008-09, pursuant to the remand order

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

ITA 465/COCH/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 7. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee contends that the AO, for AY 2008-09, pursuant to the remand order

THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SRI.JOSE THOMAS, ADOOR

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 238/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

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

disallowed by the Assessing Officer, holding that it was income from other sources. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner, who came to the conclusion that the assessee was liable to pay tax on capital gains on the amount of Rs.35 lacs after deducting an amount of Rs.7 lacs as cost of acquisition. The Department and assessee challenged the decision before

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 306/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

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

disallowed by the Assessing Officer, holding that it was income from other sources. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner, who came to the conclusion that the assessee was liable to pay tax on capital gains on the amount of Rs.35 lacs after deducting an amount of Rs.7 lacs as cost of acquisition. The Department and assessee challenged the decision before

MRS.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 210/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

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

disallowed by the Assessing Officer, holding that it was income from other sources. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner, who came to the conclusion that the assessee was liable to pay tax on capital gains on the amount of Rs.35 lacs after deducting an amount of Rs.7 lacs as cost of acquisition. The Department and assessee challenged the decision before

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 29/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

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

disallowed by the Assessing Officer, holding that it was income from other sources. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner, who came to the conclusion that the assessee was liable to pay tax on capital gains on the amount of Rs.35 lacs after deducting an amount of Rs.7 lacs as cost of acquisition. The Department and assessee challenged the decision before