Search: disallowance

5 results for “disallowance”+ Section 271Eclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai47 Chennai30 Bangalore28 Delhi25 Indore19 Ahmedabad13 Hyderabad13 Kolkata10 Agra8 Jaipur7 Surat7 Panaji5 Cochin5 Pune4 Visakhapatnam3 Nagpur2 Chandigarh2 Raipur2 SC1 Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 269S37 Section 271D23 Section 80P7 Section 143(3)5 Deduction5 Penalty5 Section 2744 Section 271E4 Cash Deposit4 Section 80P(2)

M/S. THE THIRUNELLY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,WAYANAD vs. JCIT, RANGE-2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 421/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 274Section 80P

disallowing the claim for deduction u/s. 80P by holding that the assessee is dealing with the non-members. 5. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A). While matter stood thus, the AO noticed that assessee violated the provisions of section 269SS of the Act by accepting cash deposits and repaid the deposits in cash. Therefore, made

M/S. THE THIRUNELLY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,WAYANAD vs. JCIT, RANGE-2, KOZHIKODE

M/S. THE THIRUNELLY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,WAYANAD vs. JCIT, RANGE-2, KOZHIKODE

PANAMARAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,PANAMARAM vs. JCIT, RANGE-2, KOZHIKODE

PANAMARAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,PANAMARAM, WAYANAD vs. JCIT, RANGE-2, KOZHIKODE

M/S THE PANNIYANKARA SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KOZHIKODE vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , RANGE 1, KOZHIKODE

M/S. THE THIRUNELLY CO-OPERATIVE BANKLTD.,WAYANAD vs. JCIT RANGE-2, KOZHIKODE