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.

179 results for “disallowance”+ Section 95clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,725Delhi2,965Chennai926Bangalore878Ahmedabad838Kolkata804Pune608Hyderabad557Jaipur406Indore329Chandigarh289Surat199Cochin179Visakhapatnam172Raipur140Cuttack105Amritsar100Lucknow96Agra88Rajkot78Nagpur73Guwahati62Calcutta47Karnataka46Ranchi46Patna36Allahabad27Jodhpur23Telangana23Dehradun21SC20Panaji17Jabalpur15Varanasi5Punjab & Haryana2Orissa2Kerala2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 25071Section 143(3)51Section 26336Addition to Income34Section 37(1)28Disallowance25Deduction22Section 80P16Section 14A15Section 80P(2)(a)

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ERNAKULAM

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 401/COCH/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

disallowance as held in Pr. CIT v. McDonalds India (P.) Ltd. ITA 725/2018 decided on 22nd October, 2018 cannot exceed the exempt income of that year. This decision follows the ratio and judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. v. CI T[2018] 402 ITR 640/254 Taxman 325/91 taxmann.com 154 and the earlier judgments

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

Showing 1–20 of 179 · Page 1 of 9

...
14
Section 143(1)(a)12
Capital Gains9

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 403/COCH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

disallowance as held in Pr. CIT v. McDonalds India (P.) Ltd. ITA 725/2018 decided on 22nd October, 2018 cannot exceed the exempt income of that year. This decision follows the ratio and judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. v. CI T[2018] 402 ITR 640/254 Taxman 325/91 taxmann.com 154 and the earlier judgments

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 404/COCH/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

disallowance as held in Pr. CIT v. McDonalds India (P.) Ltd. ITA 725/2018 decided on 22nd October, 2018 cannot exceed the exempt income of that year. This decision follows the ratio and judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. v. CI T[2018] 402 ITR 640/254 Taxman 325/91 taxmann.com 154 and the earlier judgments

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 400/COCH/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

disallowance as held in Pr. CIT v. McDonalds India (P.) Ltd. ITA 725/2018 decided on 22nd October, 2018 cannot exceed the exempt income of that year. This decision follows the ratio and judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. v. CI T[2018] 402 ITR 640/254 Taxman 325/91 taxmann.com 154 and the earlier judgments

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 402/COCH/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

disallowance as held in Pr. CIT v. McDonalds India (P.) Ltd. ITA 725/2018 decided on 22nd October, 2018 cannot exceed the exempt income of that year. This decision follows the ratio and judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. v. CI T[2018] 402 ITR 640/254 Taxman 325/91 taxmann.com 154 and the earlier judgments

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)

disallowed all these payments by invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The CBDT vide circular No.715 dated 8.8.1995 has also clarified that sections 194C and 194J refer to any sum paid. Thus as TDS is to be deducted on `any sum paid’; hence it does not make any difference as to whether the sum is paid

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)

disallowed all these payments by invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The CBDT vide circular No.715 dated 8.8.1995 has also clarified that sections 194C and 194J refer to any sum paid. Thus as TDS is to be deducted on `any sum paid’; hence it does not make any difference as to whether the sum is paid

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

disallowance of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application

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

disallowance of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application

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

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

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

disallowance of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application

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

disallowance of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application

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

disallowance of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application

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

disallowance of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application

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

disallowance of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application

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 of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application of taw with reference to Grounds of Appeal

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 of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application of taw with reference to Grounds of Appeal

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 of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application of taw with reference to Grounds of Appeal

M/S OLAVANNA SERVICE CO-OP BANK,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO WARD 2(3), KOZHIKODE

In the result, all the appealsare allowed

ITA 47/COCH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 80Section 80ASection 80P

95/ Coch/2023 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Kollad Service Co-Operative The Income Tax Officer Bank Ltd. Ward – 2, Kottayam vs. Kollad, Kottayam 686004 [PAN:AAAAK2083Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 995/ /Coch/2022 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Thachnattukara Farmers The Income Tax Officer Producer Company Ltd. Ward – 1, Palakkad 9/38, KTA Complex, Palode vs. Mannarkkad, Palakkad 678583 [PAN:AAFCT3538G] (Appellant) (Respondent

KOLLAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. ITO WARD 2 , KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appealsare allowed

ITA 95/COCH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 80Section 80ASection 80P

95/ Coch/2023 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Kollad Service Co-Operative The Income Tax Officer Bank Ltd. Ward – 2, Kottayam vs. Kollad, Kottayam 686004 [PAN:AAAAK2083Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 995/ /Coch/2022 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Thachnattukara Farmers The Income Tax Officer Producer Company Ltd. Ward – 1, Palakkad 9/38, KTA Complex, Palode vs. Mannarkkad, Palakkad 678583 [PAN:AAFCT3538G] (Appellant) (Respondent

THACHANATTUKARA FARMERS PRODUCERS COMPANY,PALAKKAD vs. ITO WARD 1, PALAKKAD

In the result, all the appealsare allowed

ITA 995/COCH/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 80Section 80ASection 80P

95/ Coch/2023 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Kollad Service Co-Operative The Income Tax Officer Bank Ltd. Ward – 2, Kottayam vs. Kollad, Kottayam 686004 [PAN:AAAAK2083Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 995/ /Coch/2022 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Thachnattukara Farmers The Income Tax Officer Producer Company Ltd. Ward – 1, Palakkad 9/38, KTA Complex, Palode vs. Mannarkkad, Palakkad 678583 [PAN:AAFCT3538G] (Appellant) (Respondent