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.

2 results for “disallowance”+ Section 92C(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai720Delhi581Bangalore313Kolkata143Ahmedabad94Chennai70Pune57Hyderabad50Jaipur12Karnataka7Indore7Visakhapatnam6Surat5Guwahati2Cochin2Calcutta2Panaji2Amritsar2Raipur2Jodhpur2Nagpur1Telangana1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 144C(5)2Section 92C(2)2Section 10B2Transfer Pricing2Disallowance2Comparables/TP2

THE JT CIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. ALLIANZ CORNHILL INFORMATION SERVICES P. LTD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the

ITA 185/COCH/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year : 2010-11

Section 10BSection 144C(5)Section 92C(2)

92C(2) of the Act. 8. Disallowance of tax holiday section 10B of the Act On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Joint Commissioner of Income-tax ("JCIT") on direction made by the Dispute Resolution Panel ('DRP') has erred in disallowing Rs. I4,19,80,333/- claimed by the Company as deduction

M/S.ALLIANZ CORNHILL INFORMATION SERVICES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. JTCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the

ITA 191/COCH/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed
ITAT Cochin
20 Dec 2019
AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year : 2010-11

Section 10BSection 144C(5)Section 92C(2)

92C(2) of the Act. 8. Disallowance of tax holiday section 10B of the Act On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Joint Commissioner of Income-tax ("JCIT") on direction made by the Dispute Resolution Panel ('DRP') has erred in disallowing Rs. I4,19,80,333/- claimed by the Company as deduction