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.

117 results for “disallowance”+ Unexplained Investmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,199Delhi1,624Chennai825Kolkata643Jaipur468Bangalore406Ahmedabad392Hyderabad387Pune262Indore252Chandigarh210Surat152Rajkot136Raipur126Visakhapatnam124Cochin117Nagpur106Amritsar91Cuttack75Guwahati56Lucknow54Agra43Panaji40Calcutta38Allahabad36Jodhpur34Ranchi22Dehradun16Karnataka15Patna14Varanasi11Jabalpur10Telangana9SC5Orissa2Punjab & Haryana1Rajasthan1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 250106Section 143(3)37Addition to Income28Disallowance28Section 6927Section 153A27Section 80P24Section 4024Deduction23Section 68

SMT.K.B.SONY,COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, COCHIN

In the result, i) The appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 320/COCH/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 May 2018AY 2009-10

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

Section 69

unexplained investment of the assessee u/s. 69 of the I.T. Act. On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. I.T.A. Nos. 383 -386, 322-324, 319-321 &, 387-390/C/2015 2.2 Against this, the assessee is in appeal before us. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has not deposited any money in the vendor

SMT.JAMMELA,KOLLAM vs. THE DCIT, KOLLAM

In the result, all the three appeals of the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 291/COCH/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Aug 2019AY 2006-07

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

Showing 1–20 of 117 · Page 1 of 6

22
Section 26321
Unexplained Investment20
Section 142(1)
Section 69

disallowances with the following remarks. Unexplained investments: As per the seized documents specified below the Assessee has invested the purchase

SMT.JAMMELA S,KOLLAM vs. THE DCIT, KOLLAM

In the result, all the three appeals of the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 293/COCH/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

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

Section 142(1)Section 69

disallowances with the following remarks. Unexplained investments: As per the seized documents specified below the Assessee has invested the purchase

SMT.JAMMELA S,KOLLAM vs. THE DCIT, KOLLAM

In the result, all the three appeals of the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 292/COCH/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

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

Section 142(1)Section 69

disallowances with the following remarks. Unexplained investments: As per the seized documents specified below the Assessee has invested the purchase

DCIT CIRCLE 1(1) & TPS, THRISSUR, THRISSUR vs. KONUPARAMBAN OUSEPH ITTOOP, POTTA CHALAKKUDY

In the result appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 257/COCH/2025[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Assessment Year:2013-14 Konuparamban Ouseph Ittoop .......... Appellant Potta, Thrissur – 680722. Pan: Aacpi9545G Vs. Dcit .......... Respondent Thrissur. Assessment Year:2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Sathish John Kanichai, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 263

unexplained investment in construction of flat based on the DVO report. As regards the addition on account of development expenditure of Rs.51,37,500/-, the CIT(A) directed the AO to allow the benefit of cost of 5 Konuparamban Ouseph Ittoop vs. DCIT DCIT vs. Konuparamban Ouseph Ittoop improvement as per the details submitted by the assessee and also grant

SRI UMA MAHESHWARA RAO CHINNI,GUNTUR vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the instant appeals by the assesses are dismissed

ITA 895/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasuma Maheshwara Rao Chinni Asst. Cit, Central Circle -1, Hno. 7-298, 7 Ward Aayakar Bhavan (North Block) Gandhi Bomma Centre Vs. Kozhikode 673001 Dachepalle, Guntur 522414 [Pan:Arjpc0342D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 115BSection 132ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 69A

investment, acquisition or expenditure, as the case may be, have not been explained or satisfactorily explained. Therefore, in these cases, the source not being known, such deemed income will not fall even under the head “Income from other sources”. Therefore, the corresponding deductions which are applicable to the incomes under any of these various heads, will not be attracted

SRI SRAVAN KUMAR NEELA,NALGONDA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the instant appeals by the assesses are dismissed

ITA 899/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasuma Maheshwara Rao Chinni Asst. Cit, Central Circle -1, Hno. 7-298, 7 Ward Aayakar Bhavan (North Block) Gandhi Bomma Centre Vs. Kozhikode 673001 Dachepalle, Guntur 522414 [Pan:Arjpc0342D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 115BSection 132ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 69A

investment, acquisition or expenditure, as the case may be, have not been explained or satisfactorily explained. Therefore, in these cases, the source not being known, such deemed income will not fall even under the head “Income from other sources”. Therefore, the corresponding deductions which are applicable to the incomes under any of these various heads, will not be attracted

RAFEEK,KERALA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesee is allowed for statistical purposes and the Stay Application is dismissed

ITA 861/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S. & Sa.No.58/Coch/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.861/Coch/2022) (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Rafeek Vs Ito, Ward-3 Kochukaleeckal A.N.Puram Krishnapuram Alappuzha Kappilmekku Kerala-688 011 Alappuzha-690 533 Pan – Akjpr2342F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri Suresh Varma, Ca Revenue By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing: 02.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 08 .03.2023 O R D E R Per: George George K., J.M. This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 13.09.2021. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2017-18. The Assessee Also Filed A Stay Application Seeking To Stay The Recovery Of Outstanding Tax Arrears.

For Appellant: Sri Suresh Varma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 44ASection 68Section 69

disallowed u/s. 69 and u/s. 68 of the I.T.Act, 1961 as unexplained investment and unexplained cash credit respectively as per the assessment

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 223/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

unexplained investment u/s 69 by overlooking the fact that under similar circumstance, deposits, net of withdrawals, in undisclosed bank account were only taken in the computation of income in the assessments of V.N Radhakrishnan, the person searched in this group. 4. Without prejudice to the grounds above, the learned Commissioner went wrong in upholding the disallowance

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 221/COCH/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

unexplained investment u/s 69 by overlooking the fact that under similar circumstance, deposits, net of withdrawals, in undisclosed bank account were only taken in the computation of income in the assessments of V.N Radhakrishnan, the person searched in this group. 4. Without prejudice to the grounds above, the learned Commissioner went wrong in upholding the disallowance

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 220/COCH/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

unexplained investment u/s 69 by overlooking the fact that under similar circumstance, deposits, net of withdrawals, in undisclosed bank account were only taken in the computation of income in the assessments of V.N Radhakrishnan, the person searched in this group. 4. Without prejudice to the grounds above, the learned Commissioner went wrong in upholding the disallowance

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 222/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

unexplained investment u/s 69 by overlooking the fact that under similar circumstance, deposits, net of withdrawals, in undisclosed bank account were only taken in the computation of income in the assessments of V.N Radhakrishnan, the person searched in this group. 4. Without prejudice to the grounds above, the learned Commissioner went wrong in upholding the disallowance

SHRI.P.V. RAVEENDRAN,KANNUR vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 303/COCH/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Sreedharan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shantam Bose, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 263Section 3(1)(b)Section 68

unexplained investment and as such he ought not to have invoked section 115BBE of the IT Act, 1961. 6. For the above and other reasons to be urged at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the learned ITAT may be Page 3 ITA Nos. 302 & 303/Coch/2020 pleased to cancel the order under section 263 passed by the Principal

SRI.P.V.RAVINDRAN,KANNUR vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 302/COCH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Sreedharan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shantam Bose, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 263Section 3(1)(b)Section 68

unexplained investment and as such he ought not to have invoked section 115BBE of the IT Act, 1961. 6. For the above and other reasons to be urged at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the learned ITAT may be Page 3 ITA Nos. 302 & 303/Coch/2020 pleased to cancel the order under section 263 passed by the Principal

KEERAN MUHAMMED BASHEER,TALIPARAMBA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 509/COCH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

disallowances. In tax proceedings, unearthed tangible or corroborative material evidence is crucial to justify the additions to an assessee's income. During a search, the tax authorities are expected to find and seize tangible evidence of undisclosed income or assets, such as: Undisclosed cash or bank accounts  Unexplained investments

KODIYIL MUHAMMED MADANI(PARTNER ABC SALES CORPORATION).,TALIPARAMBA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 529/COCH/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

disallowances. In tax proceedings, unearthed tangible or corroborative material evidence is crucial to justify the additions to an assessee's income. During a search, the tax authorities are expected to find and seize tangible evidence of undisclosed income or assets, such as: Undisclosed cash or bank accounts  Unexplained investments

BATHX BATHWARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,COCHIN vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 438/COCH/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

disallowances. In tax proceedings, unearthed tangible or corroborative material evidence is crucial to justify the additions to an assessee's income. During a search, the tax authorities are expected to find and seize tangible evidence of undisclosed income or assets, such as: Undisclosed cash or bank accounts  Unexplained investments

ABC SALES CORPORATION,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 458/COCH/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

disallowances. In tax proceedings, unearthed tangible or corroborative material evidence is crucial to justify the additions to an assessee's income. During a search, the tax authorities are expected to find and seize tangible evidence of undisclosed income or assets, such as: Undisclosed cash or bank accounts  Unexplained investments

ABC BUILDWARE INDIA (P) LIMITED,PARIYARAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 531/COCH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

disallowances. In tax proceedings, unearthed tangible or corroborative material evidence is crucial to justify the additions to an assessee's income. During a search, the tax authorities are expected to find and seize tangible evidence of undisclosed income or assets, such as: Undisclosed cash or bank accounts  Unexplained investments

KODIYIL MUHAMMED MADANI(PARTNER) ABC SALES CORPORATION,TALIPARAMBA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CALICUT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 530/COCH/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

disallowances. In tax proceedings, unearthed tangible or corroborative material evidence is crucial to justify the additions to an assessee's income. During a search, the tax authorities are expected to find and seize tangible evidence of undisclosed income or assets, such as: Undisclosed cash or bank accounts  Unexplained investments