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.

135 results for “disallowance”+ Penaltyclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,264Delhi4,366Ahmedabad1,372Chennai1,007Bangalore1,006Kolkata994Jaipur771Pune766Hyderabad533Indore462Chandigarh352Surat338Cochin189Raipur180Rajkot161Cuttack135Agra124Lucknow122Nagpur118Amritsar99Visakhapatnam91Karnataka67Guwahati64Allahabad55Ranchi52SC47Calcutta43Telangana35Dehradun34Jodhpur32Varanasi31Jabalpur29Panaji25Patna24Kerala6Punjab & Haryana5Rajasthan3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Himachal Pradesh1Gauhati1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Orissa1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)62Addition to Income61Section 271A57Penalty52Disallowance51Section 801A45Section 270A37Section 143(3)35Section 4034Section 271D

SUBHALAXMI AGENCIES PVT. LTD.,NAYAGARH vs. JCIT, RAMGE-2, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and that of

ITA 132/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 194ASection 194CSection 194JSection 40

disallowance of penalty of Rs.92,200/- paid to CESU. 41. The Assessing Officer observed that on verification of total electricity

ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. VODAFONE SPACETEL LIMITED, BHUBANESWAR

Showing 1–20 of 135 · Page 1 of 7

26
Deduction26
Section 194A24

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

ITA 286/CTK/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.285/Ctk/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/S Vodafone Mobile Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2), Services Limited, Bhubaneswar (Formerly Known As Vodafone Spacetel Limited Which Now Stands Amalgamated With Vodafone Mobile Services Limited), Registered Office, C-48, Okhla Industrial Area Phase-Ii, New Delhi "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2207 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.286/Ctk/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Acit, Circle-1(2), Vs. M/S Vodafone Spacetel Ltd. 2Nd Bhubaneswar Moudle-2A, Floor, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar-751023 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2207 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sparsh Bhargava, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.K.Mohapatra, Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 29/08/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 31/08/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 26.04.2016 Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0287/15-16 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. Since Issues In Both The Appeals Are Common, Therefore, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. For The Sake

For Appellant: Shri Sparsh Bhargava, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, CITDR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

disallowance on account of penalty imposed by DoT, provision for LTIP and proportionate interest debited to P&L A/c. 4. Aggrieved

M/S. VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

ITA 285/CTK/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.285/Ctk/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/S Vodafone Mobile Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2), Services Limited, Bhubaneswar (Formerly Known As Vodafone Spacetel Limited Which Now Stands Amalgamated With Vodafone Mobile Services Limited), Registered Office, C-48, Okhla Industrial Area Phase-Ii, New Delhi "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2207 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.286/Ctk/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Acit, Circle-1(2), Vs. M/S Vodafone Spacetel Ltd. 2Nd Bhubaneswar Moudle-2A, Floor, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar-751023 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2207 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sparsh Bhargava, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.K.Mohapatra, Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 29/08/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 31/08/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 26.04.2016 Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0287/15-16 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. Since Issues In Both The Appeals Are Common, Therefore, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. For The Sake

For Appellant: Shri Sparsh Bhargava, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, CITDR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

disallowance on account of penalty imposed by DoT, provision for LTIP and proportionate interest debited to P&L A/c. 4. Aggrieved

ACIT, CUTTACK vs. M/S. DUSHASAN JENA, CUTTACK

In the result, the appeal was allowed

ITA 244/CTK/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Aug 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, CITDR
Section 269SSection 271D

penalty of Rs.16,73,937/- imposed u/s.271(1)(c) on the ground that AO had disallowed various expenditure on estimation

JCIT, CUTTACK vs. M/S. DUSHASHAN JENA, CUTTACK

In the result, the appeal was allowed

ITA 324/CTK/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Aug 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, CITDR
Section 269SSection 271D

penalty of Rs.16,73,937/- imposed u/s.271(1)(c) on the ground that AO had disallowed various expenditure on estimation

DCIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. G.V.V.CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., BHUBANESWAR

Appeal of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 297/CTK/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.297/Ctk/2015 (धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S G.V.V. Constructions Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.358, Saheed Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751007 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccg 3649 Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) & Cross Objection No.36/Ctk/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/S G.V.V.Constructions Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.358, Bhubaneswar Saheed Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751007 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccg 3649 Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Pradhan, Citdr धनधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03/08/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed An Appeal & The Assessee Has Filed Cross Objection Against The Order Of Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar In I.T.Appeal No.0593/2013-14, Dated 9-3-2015, Passed U/S.271(1)(C) & 250 Of The Act. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee When The Matter Was Called For Hearing. Hence, We Proceed To Dispose Off The Appeal On The Basis Of Material Available On Record & The Submissions Of Ld. Dr. 3. We Take Up The Revenue’S Appeal In Ita No.297/Ctk/2015, Wherein The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds :-

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 69A

penalty proceedings, the assessee filed explanations on 21.8.2013 with the reasons that donations were made to local bodies to maintain goodwill and the AO disallowed

THE KORAPUT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,JEYPORE, KORAPUT vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 348/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack19 Nov 2024AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

penalty in the present case. 4 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. At the outset, from the perusal of the assessment order, it is seen that the AO has made the addition of Rs.13,35,26,401/- by disallowing

LAXMINARAYAN TRANSPORT,JAJPUR ROAD, JAJPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1) CUTTACK, CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 130/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack03 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR
Section 40A(3)Section 80G

penalty, which can be disallowed u/s.37(1) of the Act and had consequently allowed the claim of interest. 10. In reply

MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD.,BURLA, SAMBALPUR. vs. DCIT CIRCLE2(1), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue being ITA No

ITA 41/CTK/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Girish Agrawalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.14 To 17/Ctk/2023 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.41/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2016-2017 To 2020-2021) Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, Vs Acit/Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur-768020 Pan No. :Aabcm 5188 P & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.70 To 73/Ctk/2023 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.147/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2016-2017 To 2020-2021) Acit/Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Vs Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur-768020 Pan No. :Aabcm 5188 P & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.69/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Acit/Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Vs Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur-768020 Pan No. :Aabcm 5188 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.S.Poddar, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri S.S.Poddar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT-DR
Section 271(1)(c)

penalty on account of various disallowance made in the assessment order for the assessment year 2015-2016. It was the submission

MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD.,BURLA, SAMBALPUR. vs. DCIT CIRCLE2(1), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue being ITA No

ITA 14/CTK/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Girish Agrawalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.14 To 17/Ctk/2023 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.41/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2016-2017 To 2020-2021) Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, Vs Acit/Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur-768020 Pan No. :Aabcm 5188 P & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.70 To 73/Ctk/2023 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.147/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2016-2017 To 2020-2021) Acit/Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Vs Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur-768020 Pan No. :Aabcm 5188 P & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.69/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Acit/Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Vs Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur-768020 Pan No. :Aabcm 5188 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.S.Poddar, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri S.S.Poddar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT-DR
Section 271(1)(c)

penalty on account of various disallowance made in the assessment order for the assessment year 2015-2016. It was the submission

ORISSA RURAL HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED(ORHDC),KHORDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 516/CTK/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri B.R.Pattnaik, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 270ASection 43B

disallowed the interest shown to be due to the Government by applying the provision for section 43B of the Act. It was the submission that the interest payable to the Government was not hit by the provisions of section 43B of the Act. It was against the assessment orders. It was the submission that the penalty

ORISSA RURAL HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED(ORHDC),KHORDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 515/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri B.R.Pattnaik, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 270ASection 43B

disallowed the interest shown to be due to the Government by applying the provision for section 43B of the Act. It was the submission that the interest payable to the Government was not hit by the provisions of section 43B of the Act. It was against the assessment orders. It was the submission that the penalty

SANJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL,ROURKELA vs. ITO,WARD-2, ROURKELA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed partly

ITA 15/CTK/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jun 2020AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Shri B.Panda, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Ku. Chakraborty, DR
Section 143(1)Section 201Section 40

penalty as provided under the income Tax Act but no disallowance of the expenditure can be made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act in view

SANJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL,ROURKELA vs. ITO,WARD-2, ROURKELA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed partly

ITA 16/CTK/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jun 2020AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Shri B.Panda, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Ku. Chakraborty, DR
Section 143(1)Section 201Section 40

penalty as provided under the income Tax Act but no disallowance of the expenditure can be made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act in view

DILLIP KUMAR NAYAK,BHUBANESWAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-2, BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 330/CTK/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.330 & 339/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-2012 & 2012-2013) Shri Dilip Kumar Nayak, Vs. Jcit, Range-2, Bhubaneswar Plot No.270/A, Saheed Nagar, Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khurda, Odisha-751016 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan No. : Aahpn 0352 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 40

penalty as provided under the income Tax Act but no disallowance of the expenditure can be made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act in view

MARUTI TRADING CO,JAGAATSINGHPUR vs. ITO WARD PARADEEP, PARADEEP

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 213/CTK/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack16 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialassessment Year : 2015-16 Maruti Trading Co., Maruti Trading Co., Panisalia, Vs. Ito, Ward, Paradeep. Ito, Ward, Paradeep. Jagatsinghpur. Jagatsinghpur. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aalfm 3677 L (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty P.R.Mohanty, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/08 8/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/0 /08/2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P.R.MohantyFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

disallowance of expenses in the profit and loss account. It was the submission that consequent to the said additions, penalty

INDRANI PATNAIK,ROURKELA vs. DCIT, RORUKELA CIRCLE, ROURKELA

In the result, appeals of the revenue for assessment years 2012-13 &

ITA 393/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam,, CIT DR

penalty for breach of law. The nomenclature punitive charges cannot lead to disallowance u/s.37 if the payment is not for any purpose

ACIT, RORUKELA CIRCLE, ROURKELA vs. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, appeals of the revenue for assessment years 2012-13 &

ITA 389/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam,, CIT DR

penalty for breach of law. The nomenclature punitive charges cannot lead to disallowance u/s.37 if the payment is not for any purpose

M/S. SHREE SAI ENTERPRISES,BHUBANESWAR vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-4, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 290/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack23 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2014-2015

For Appellant: Shri N.R.BiswalFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 156Section 269SSection 271D

disallowed by the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings. Therefore, the Assessing Officer levied penalty by considering incorrect facts, hence, penalty

MARUTI ESTATE (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 321/CTK/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Apr 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. Tigga, DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80I

penalty of Rs.5,97,480/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer disallowed