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.

217 results for “disallowance”+ Section 9(1)(vii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,074Delhi2,902Bangalore979Chennai911Kolkata653Ahmedabad613Jaipur456Pune390Hyderabad296Chandigarh247Indore245Cochin217Surat153Visakhapatnam144Rajkot138Raipur134Nagpur134Cuttack129Karnataka94Guwahati74Amritsar70Lucknow68Ranchi53Panaji49Calcutta46Jodhpur33Telangana31Patna31Allahabad30SC30Agra26Dehradun25Varanasi16Kerala10Jabalpur8Punjab & Haryana4Himachal Pradesh4Orissa2Rajasthan2Gauhati1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 25097Section 80P62Section 143(3)53Deduction43Disallowance37Section 5635Addition to Income25Section 4019Section 80P(2)16Section 153A

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)

section 195(1) of the Act holding that the amounts paid to lead managers and managers were chargeable to tax in India as fees for technical services within the meaning of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. The Appellate Commissioner also upheld the order of the assessing officer. On further appeal before the Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal

Showing 1–20 of 217 · Page 1 of 11

...
14
Section 26313
Revision u/s 26310

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)

section 195(1) of the Act holding that the amounts paid to lead managers and managers were chargeable to tax in India as fees for technical services within the meaning of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. The Appellate Commissioner also upheld the order of the assessing officer. On further appeal before the Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

ITA 394/COCH/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

Section 36(1) (vii)of the Act, in consonance, with Vijaya Bank (supra) and the declaration made therein. The income tax appeals are partly allowed.” 8. We thus restore the assessee’s instant sec.36(1)(vii) disallowance back to the Assessing Officer for afresh verification in light of “Vijay Bank” and the relevant write off in the balance sheet

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

ITA 395/COCH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

Section 36(1) (vii)of the Act, in consonance, with Vijaya Bank (supra) and the declaration made therein. The income tax appeals are partly allowed.” 8. We thus restore the assessee’s instant sec.36(1)(vii) disallowance back to the Assessing Officer for afresh verification in light of “Vijay Bank” and the relevant write off in the balance sheet

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

ITA 396/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

Section 36(1) (vii)of the Act, in consonance, with Vijaya Bank (supra) and the declaration made therein. The income tax appeals are partly allowed.” 8. We thus restore the assessee’s instant sec.36(1)(vii) disallowance back to the Assessing Officer for afresh verification in light of “Vijay Bank” and the relevant write off in the balance sheet

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

ITA 393/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

Section 36(1) (vii)of the Act, in consonance, with Vijaya Bank (supra) and the declaration made therein. The income tax appeals are partly allowed.” 8. We thus restore the assessee’s instant sec.36(1)(vii) disallowance back to the Assessing Officer for afresh verification in light of “Vijay Bank” and the relevant write off in the balance sheet

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

ITA 399/COCH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

Section 36(1) (vii)of the Act, in consonance, with Vijaya Bank (supra) and the declaration made therein. The income tax appeals are partly allowed.” 8. We thus restore the assessee’s instant sec.36(1)(vii) disallowance back to the Assessing Officer for afresh verification in light of “Vijay Bank” and the relevant write off in the balance sheet

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

ITA 397/COCH/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

Section 36(1) (vii)of the Act, in consonance, with Vijaya Bank (supra) and the declaration made therein. The income tax appeals are partly allowed.” 8. We thus restore the assessee’s instant sec.36(1)(vii) disallowance back to the Assessing Officer for afresh verification in light of “Vijay Bank” and the relevant write off in the balance sheet

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THRISSUR vs. THE CSB BANK LTD, THRISSUR

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 542/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Satish Modi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 144BSection 147Section 250

disallowance of provisions of bad and doubtful debts to the extent of Rs. 57.57 crores is deleted. 3. The CIT(A) has erred on the following points while deleting the Book profit enhancement consequent to bad and doubtful debt the extent of Rs. 57.57 crores. 3.1. Vijaya Bank decision is applicable only for normal Income and not MAT Income [Minimum

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 101/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

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

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40aSection 9(1)(vii)

disallowing the said payments. 3. The first common ground in all the appeals is with regard to the action of the CIT(A) in upholding the tax levied by the Assessing Officer u/s. 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T. Act on account of consulting services as there is no deduction of TDS in terms

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 102/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

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

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40aSection 9(1)(vii)

disallowing the said payments. 3. The first common ground in all the appeals is with regard to the action of the CIT(A) in upholding the tax levied by the Assessing Officer u/s. 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T. Act on account of consulting services as there is no deduction of TDS in terms

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 103/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

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

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40aSection 9(1)(vii)

disallowing the said payments. 3. The first common ground in all the appeals is with regard to the action of the CIT(A) in upholding the tax levied by the Assessing Officer u/s. 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T. Act on account of consulting services as there is no deduction of TDS in terms

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 99/COCH/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

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

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40aSection 9(1)(vii)

disallowing the said payments. 3. The first common ground in all the appeals is with regard to the action of the CIT(A) in upholding the tax levied by the Assessing Officer u/s. 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T. Act on account of consulting services as there is no deduction of TDS in terms

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 100/COCH/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

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

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40aSection 9(1)(vii)

disallowing the said payments. 3. The first common ground in all the appeals is with regard to the action of the CIT(A) in upholding the tax levied by the Assessing Officer u/s. 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T. Act on account of consulting services as there is no deduction of TDS in terms

ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.GEOFIN COMTRADE LTD, KOCHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are allowed

ITA 967/COCH/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

For Appellant: Ms. Rohini Thampi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

vii), i.e., is not obliterated (written off), and represents normal provision toward diminution in the value of debtors, it would be liable to be allowed u/s. 36(1)(viia), an independent provision, which stands on its own footing, as explained in Catholic Syrian Bank v. CIT [2012] 343 ITR 270 (SC). This provision, though again liable to be reflected

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE -1 (1), KOCHI vs. M/S GEOFIN COMTRADE LTD, KOCHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are allowed

ITA 968/COCH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

For Appellant: Ms. Rohini Thampi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

vii), i.e., is not obliterated (written off), and represents normal provision toward diminution in the value of debtors, it would be liable to be allowed u/s. 36(1)(viia), an independent provision, which stands on its own footing, as explained in Catholic Syrian Bank v. CIT [2012] 343 ITR 270 (SC). This provision, though again liable to be reflected

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), TIRUR, TIRUR vs. M/S. SOUTH MALABAR GRAMINA BANK H.O., MALAPPURAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 366/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

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

Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowance of deduction u/s. 36(1)(vii) towards provision for bad and doubtful advances of rural advances on the ground that no provision was made in the accounts. 9. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that provisions of section

M/S.SOUTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK ( PRESENTLY- KERALA GRAMIN BANK),MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE_2(2), TIRUR, TIRUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 363/COCH/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

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

Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowance of deduction u/s. 36(1)(vii) towards provision for bad and doubtful advances of rural advances on the ground that no provision was made in the accounts. 9. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that provisions of section

M/S.SOUTH MALABAR GRAMINA BANK,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), TIRUR, THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), TIRUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 364/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

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

Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowance of deduction u/s. 36(1)(vii) towards provision for bad and doubtful advances of rural advances on the ground that no provision was made in the accounts. 9. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that provisions of section

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

1)(vii). Your appellant craves leave to add or to amend and/or vary the grounds of appeal before or at time of hearing.” 9. Suffice to say, both the learned representatives during the course of hearing duly agree that the hon'ble jurisdictional high court has itself settled the issue in department’s favour so far as allowability