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.

6 results for “disallowance”+ Section 264clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai286Delhi256Chennai104Hyderabad72Jaipur65Kolkata56Bangalore50Ahmedabad46Pune30Chandigarh27Rajkot26Raipur22Indore20Lucknow18SC17Surat10Nagpur10Cuttack7Guwahati7Jodhpur7Cochin6Patna5Allahabad5Visakhapatnam3Dehradun3Amritsar2Ranchi2Jabalpur1Agra1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 2(15)16Section 80P4Section 2634Section 114Disallowance3Section 2502Section 12A2Section 143(2)2Section 143(1)2Exemption

THE KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LTD.,KOLLAM vs. THE DICT, KOLLAM

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 96/COCH/2022[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Mar 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasthe Kerala Minerals & Metals Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Sankaramangalam Circle - 1, Kollam Chavara, Kollam 691001 Vs. [Pan:Aaact8118R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev R., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 154Section 244A

264 or an order of the Settlement Commission under sub-section (4) of section 245D, the amount on which interest was payable under sub- section (1) has been increased or reduced, as the case may be, the interest shall be increased or reduced accordingly, and in a case where the interest is reduced, the Assessing Officer shall serve

M/S. PARAVUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, KOLLAM

2

In the result, the appeal and stay petition filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 767/COCH/2023[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Sri Santosh P. Abraham, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, D.R
Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowing the certificate issued by the statutory authority under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. E. The CIT(Appeal) went wrong in finding that appellant is not eligible for deduction for the interest income received u/s 80P(2)(d) . The issues covered in favour of the appellant of the decision of the Kerala High Court in the case of Principal

MALANADU FARMERS SOCIETY ,KOTTAYAM vs. DCIT EXEMPTIONS, TVM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 632/COCH/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Mar 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Jose Kappan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prashant V.K., CIT(DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)Section 263

264 and that the AO did not examine the claim of the assessee for an exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Accordingly, the CIT(E) issued a show cause notice u/S. 263 of the Act which reads as under:- “"2. In your case, for the AY 2017-18, assessment was completed on 11/10/2019 accepting the return of income filed

MALANADU MILK PRODUCERS SOCIETY,KOTTAYAM vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, TVM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 633/COCH/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Mar 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Jose Kappan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prashant V.K., CIT(DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)Section 263

264 and that the AO did not examine the claim of the assessee for an exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Accordingly, the CIT(E) issued a show cause notice u/S. 263 of the Act which reads as under:- “"2. In your case, for the AY 2017-18, assessment was completed on 11/10/2019 accepting the return of income filed

ANUPAMACHATHANKANDATH,PALAKKAD vs. THE ACIT CIRCLE-1, PALAKKAD

In the result, appeals are allowed

ITA 26/COCH/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri. Padmanathan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, SR AR

264 in the case of NITTA JATIYA (ACIAS & NITAJATIA) Vs. DCIT, Central Charge Range 7(1) Mumbai, at para 5 observed “In this case, we note that both of the authorities have failed to discharge their duties properly as none of the parties have brought any substantial material on records to prove that the assesse has incurred expenses over

ANUPAMA CHATHANKANDATH ,PALAKKAD vs. THE ACIT CIRCLE-1, PALAKKAD

In the result, appeals are allowed

ITA 27/COCH/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri. Padmanathan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, SR AR

264 in the case of NITTA JATIYA (ACIAS & NITAJATIA) Vs. DCIT, Central Charge Range 7(1) Mumbai, at para 5 observed “In this case, we note that both of the authorities have failed to discharge their duties properly as none of the parties have brought any substantial material on records to prove that the assesse has incurred expenses over