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.

204 results for “disallowance”+ Section 73clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,014Delhi3,353Bangalore1,091Kolkata1,071Chennai1,023Ahmedabad881Pune635Hyderabad541Jaipur499Indore386Chandigarh308Surat265Cochin204Visakhapatnam146Cuttack138Raipur138Lucknow103Rajkot89Nagpur81Amritsar71Jodhpur50Guwahati49Ranchi49Karnataka47Allahabad47Calcutta44Patna30Agra24Dehradun24Telangana19Panaji17SC17Jabalpur16Varanasi10Punjab & Haryana3Rajasthan2Kerala2Gauhati1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 25066Section 143(3)49Section 26342Addition to Income40Disallowance36Section 36(1)(viia)26Section 54F24Section 37(1)22Deduction20Section 36(1)

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, PATHANAMTHITTA

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

ITA 69/COCH/2018[2002-03]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2002-03

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

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

73-75/Coch/2018 accordance with the law. Accordingly, the assessing officer passed an order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 254 on 19/07/2013 and disallowed interest paid on public deposits amounting to Rs. 7,45,07,387/-. 4.1 Therefore, the appeal under consideration is against the order under section

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

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

Showing 1–20 of 204 · Page 1 of 11

...
17
Section 14A17
Exemption12
ITA 70/COCH/2018[2003-04]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2003-04

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

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

73-75/Coch/2018 accordance with the law. Accordingly, the assessing officer passed an order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 254 on 19/07/2013 and disallowed interest paid on public deposits amounting to Rs. 7,45,07,387/-. 4.1 Therefore, the appeal under consideration is against the order under section

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

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

ITA 71/COCH/2018[2004-05]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2004-05

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

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

73-75/Coch/2018 accordance with the law. Accordingly, the assessing officer passed an order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 254 on 19/07/2013 and disallowed interest paid on public deposits amounting to Rs. 7,45,07,387/-. 4.1 Therefore, the appeal under consideration is against the order under section

THE ACIT, THIRUVALLA vs. M/S.MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS, KOZHENCHERRY

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

ITA 73/COCH/2018[2002-03]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2002-03

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

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

73-75/Coch/2018 accordance with the law. Accordingly, the assessing officer passed an order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 254 on 19/07/2013 and disallowed interest paid on public deposits amounting to Rs. 7,45,07,387/-. 4.1 Therefore, the appeal under consideration is against the order under section

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS,, KOZHENCHERRY

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

ITA 74/COCH/2018[2003-04]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2003-04

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

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

73-75/Coch/2018 accordance with the law. Accordingly, the assessing officer passed an order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 254 on 19/07/2013 and disallowed interest paid on public deposits amounting to Rs. 7,45,07,387/-. 4.1 Therefore, the appeal under consideration is against the order under section

THE ACIT, THIRUVALLA vs. M/S.MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS, KOZHENCHERRY

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

ITA 75/COCH/2018[2005-06]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2005-06

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

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

73-75/Coch/2018 accordance with the law. Accordingly, the assessing officer passed an order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 254 on 19/07/2013 and disallowed interest paid on public deposits amounting to Rs. 7,45,07,387/-. 4.1 Therefore, the appeal under consideration is against the order under section

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

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

ITA 72/COCH/2018[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2007-08

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

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

73-75/Coch/2018 accordance with the law. Accordingly, the assessing officer passed an order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 254 on 19/07/2013 and disallowed interest paid on public deposits amounting to Rs. 7,45,07,387/-. 4.1 Therefore, the appeal under consideration is against the order under section

DCIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. BRAHMOS AEROSPACE( THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) LTD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filedby

ITA 742/COCH/2019[2002-03]Status: HeardITAT Cochin23 Feb 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am Deputy Commissioner Brahmos Aerospace Of Income Tax, (Thiruvananthapuram) Ltd., Circle-1(1), V. Chackai, Thiruvananthapuram Beach Post, Kerala Tiruvananthapuram, Kerala Pan – Aabck2217K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv
Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 80

73(2) , 74(3) and 74A(3) of the 1961 Act. Thus, Section 80 also refers to the time line provided u/s 139(3), which in turn refers to prescribed time u/s 139(1) for filing of return of income and Section 139(3) also stipulates that all the provisions of the 1961 Act shall apply

SMT. MARIES JOSEPH,THRISSUR vs. DCIT, INT. TAXATION, KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 566/COCH/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Jan 2023AY 2015-2016

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

For Appellant: Shri. Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr AR
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 54F

section 54F of the Act by the assessee to the tune of Rs 86,24,063/- being investment in residential house property at ‘Skyline Infinity’, Thrissur for the AY 2015-16.; is illegal, arbitrary and unjustified. 2. The CIT (Appeals), in the appeal filed by the assessee, thoroughly went wrong in disallowing the alternate relief of Rs 73

SMT. MARIES JOSEPH,THRISSUR vs. DCIT, INT. TAXATION, KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 613/COCH/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Jan 2023AY 2015-2016

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

For Appellant: Shri. Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr AR
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 54F

section 54F of the Act by the assessee to the tune of Rs 86,24,063/- being investment in residential house property at ‘Skyline Infinity’, Thrissur for the AY 2015-16.; is illegal, arbitrary and unjustified. 2. The CIT (Appeals), in the appeal filed by the assessee, thoroughly went wrong in disallowing the alternate relief of Rs 73

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.ASPINWALL & CO. LTD, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 133/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2012-13

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

Section 14A

disallowed while computing the business income under the normal provisions of the Act but no adjustment was made while computing book profits. The Ld. AR submitted that the provisions of section 115JB, only certain items are to be added or removed which have been specified under various clauses. None of the clauses require capital gains/losses. The Ld. AR relied

ASPINWALL & COMPANY LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 60/COCH/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2006-07

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

Section 14A

disallowed while computing the business income under the normal provisions of the Act but no adjustment was made while computing book profits. The Ld. AR submitted that the provisions of section 115JB, only certain items are to be added or removed which have been specified under various clauses. None of the clauses require capital gains/losses. The Ld. AR relied

ASPINWALL & COMPANY LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 61/COCH/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2006-07

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

Section 14A

disallowed while computing the business income under the normal provisions of the Act but no adjustment was made while computing book profits. The Ld. AR submitted that the provisions of section 115JB, only certain items are to be added or removed which have been specified under various clauses. None of the clauses require capital gains/losses. The Ld. AR relied

M/S ASPINWALL & CO.,LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 128/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2012-13

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

Section 14A

disallowed while computing the business income under the normal provisions of the Act but no adjustment was made while computing book profits. The Ld. AR submitted that the provisions of section 115JB, only certain items are to be added or removed which have been specified under various clauses. None of the clauses require capital gains/losses. The Ld. AR relied

THE ACIT CIR-1(1), THRISSUR vs. SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD, THRISSUR

In the result, both the appeal filed by the assessee as well as the appeal filed

ITA 219/COCH/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

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

Section 14ASection 36(1)(viii)

section 36(1)(viii). 17.4 Applicability - These amendments will be effective from the 1st April, 2010 and will accordingly apply in respect of assessment year 2010-11 and subsequent assessment years." 9.5 It is true that the Amendment provided the deduction to National Housing Bank. But the amendment also substituted the previous words with words 'Development of Housing' which

SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD,THRISSUR vs. THE ACIT CIR-1(1), THRISSUR

In the result, both the appeal filed by the assessee as well as the appeal filed

ITA 215/COCH/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

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

Section 14ASection 36(1)(viii)

section 36(1)(viii). 17.4 Applicability - These amendments will be effective from the 1st April, 2010 and will accordingly apply in respect of assessment year 2010-11 and subsequent assessment years." 9.5 It is true that the Amendment provided the deduction to National Housing Bank. But the amendment also substituted the previous words with words 'Development of Housing' which

M/S POPULAR FINANCE COMPANY,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CIR-1,, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 202/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

disallowance u/s. 37(1) cannot be resorted to when the claim is made by the appellant u/s. 36(1) (iii) of the Act. 4. Attention is invited to a well-known legal maxim "generalibus specialia derogant", which clearly mentioned that ‘if a special provision is made on a certain matter, the matter is excluded from the general provisions'. Section

M/S.POPULAR FINANCE,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 203/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

disallowance u/s. 37(1) cannot be resorted to when the claim is made by the appellant u/s. 36(1) (iii) of the Act. 4. Attention is invited to a well-known legal maxim "generalibus specialia derogant", which clearly mentioned that ‘if a special provision is made on a certain matter, the matter is excluded from the general provisions'. Section

M/S POPULAR FINANCE COMPANY,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CIR-1,, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 204/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

disallowance u/s. 37(1) cannot be resorted to when the claim is made by the appellant u/s. 36(1) (iii) of the Act. 4. Attention is invited to a well-known legal maxim "generalibus specialia derogant", which clearly mentioned that ‘if a special provision is made on a certain matter, the matter is excluded from the general provisions'. Section

M/S.ACUMEN CAPITAL MARKET(INDIA) LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO, COCHIN

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

ITA 555/COCH/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Mar 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Abraham P George, Am & George George K, Jm Acumen Capital Marketing (I) Ltd Vs The Income Tax Officer 3Rd Floor St Reddiar & /Sons Bldg Ward 1(1), Kochi Veekshanam /Road Ernakulam ( Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 43Section 5

disallowed following iv) Loss on trading in shares amounting to Rs.21 ,30,564 is not considered as loss from speculation business as required under explanation to section 73