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.

8 results for “disallowance”+ Section 246clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai658Delhi466Bangalore192Chennai142Kolkata141Jaipur84Lucknow37Raipur37Chandigarh32Ahmedabad32Hyderabad25Indore24Pune24Nagpur20Surat16SC14Karnataka14Cuttack9Jodhpur8Cochin8Rajkot8Varanasi5Visakhapatnam4Allahabad4Patna4Telangana4Amritsar3Panaji2Jabalpur2Calcutta2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 143(1)19Section 143(3)16Section 80P14Section 409Section 80P(2)(d)9Deduction8Section 1546Section 2465Addition to Income5Section 148

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

246, relevant portion of which is extracted as below: - “7. The first contention raised before us was that under Section 194A, an individual is excluded from the liability to deduct tax and that therefore, disallowance

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

3
Reassessment3
TDS3

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

246, relevant portion of which is extracted as below: - “7. The first contention raised before us was that under Section 194A, an individual is excluded from the liability to deduct tax and that therefore, disallowance

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

246, relevant portion of which is extracted as below: - “7. The first contention raised before us was that under Section 194A, an individual is excluded from the liability to deduct tax and that therefore, disallowance

THE CHORODE SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD LL139,CHORODE vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 123/COCH/2024[AY 2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Nov 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.V.S.Narayanan, CAFor Respondent: Dr.S.Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246Section 246ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

246 in the Act by the Finance Act, 2022, the appellate authority for 143(1) order is also likely to be different as now such cases are largely adjudicated by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) unlike earlier. 5.2.4 In the context of this issue, I would also like to place reliance upon two recent decisions of the Hon'ble Tribunals

THE CHORODE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, LL139,CHORODE vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 122/COCH/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.V.S.Narayanan, CAFor Respondent: Dr.S.Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246Section 246ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

246 in the Act by the Finance Act, 2022, the appellate authority for 143(1) order is also likely to be different as now such cases are largely adjudicated by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) unlike earlier. 5.2.4 In the context of this issue, I would also like to place reliance upon two recent decisions of the Hon'ble Tribunals

CHIRAKKAL UPABOKTHRU SAHAKARNA SANGAM LTD NO. C1480,KANNUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KANNUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2013-2014 to 2015-2016 are allowed

ITA 246/COCH/2021[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cochin23 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.G Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamunna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 246Section 3Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

disallowance of the claim u/s 80P in the intimation is not in accordance with law and hence a mistake apparent on the records in the intimation. The appellant was well within its rights to file a rectification petition before the Assessing Authority to rectify this mistake. An order refusing to rectify a mistake is an appealable order u/s 246

CHIRAKKAL UPABOKTHRU SAHAKARNA SANGAM LTD NO. C1480,KANNUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KANNUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2013-2014 to 2015-2016 are allowed

ITA 245/COCH/2021[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Cochin23 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.G Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamunna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 246Section 3Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

disallowance of the claim u/s 80P in the intimation is not in accordance with law and hence a mistake apparent on the records in the intimation. The appellant was well within its rights to file a rectification petition before the Assessing Authority to rectify this mistake. An order refusing to rectify a mistake is an appealable order u/s 246

CHIRAKKAL UPABOKTHRU SAHAKARNA SANGAM LTD NO. C1480,KANNUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC , KANNUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2013-2014 to 2015-2016 are allowed

ITA 241/COCH/2021[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Cochin23 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.G Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamunna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 246Section 3Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

disallowance of the claim u/s 80P in the intimation is not in accordance with law and hence a mistake apparent on the records in the intimation. The appellant was well within its rights to file a rectification petition before the Assessing Authority to rectify this mistake. An order refusing to rectify a mistake is an appealable order u/s 246