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.

7 results for “disallowance”+ Section 153Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi590Mumbai198Bangalore126Chennai86Amritsar73Chandigarh66Cochin62Jaipur49Allahabad37Agra24Nagpur17Hyderabad17Lucknow17Raipur15Indore10Ahmedabad9Cuttack7Kolkata7Patna5Karnataka4Jodhpur4Dehradun4Visakhapatnam3Pune2Rajkot1

Key Topics

Section 153D21Section 271(1)(c)14Section 2717Section 271A7Penalty7Disallowance7Addition to Income7

SERAJUDDIN & CO,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 224/CTK/2020[2003-04]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack17 Aug 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.224 To 230/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2020 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2009 04 To 2009-2010

For Appellant: None (written submission filed)For Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 153DSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide consolidated order dated 21.01.2022. Vide paragraph 45 of the said decision dated 21.01.2022 , it was held by this Hon'ble Bench as under: “45. Since by the earlier part of this order, we have held that the assessment orders are void and bad in law and consequently, the assessment orders have

SERAJUDDIN & CO,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 225/CTK/2020[2004-05]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack17 Aug 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.224 To 230/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2020 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2009 04 To 2009-2010

For Appellant: None (written submission filed)For Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 153DSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide consolidated order dated 21.01.2022. Vide paragraph 45 of the said decision dated 21.01.2022 , it was held by this Hon'ble Bench as under: “45. Since by the earlier part of this order, we have held that the assessment orders are void and bad in law and consequently, the assessment orders have

SERAJUDDIN & CO,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 226/CTK/2020[2005-06]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack17 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.224 To 230/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2020 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2009 04 To 2009-2010

For Appellant: None (written submission filed)For Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 153DSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide consolidated order dated 21.01.2022. Vide paragraph 45 of the said decision dated 21.01.2022 , it was held by this Hon'ble Bench as under: “45. Since by the earlier part of this order, we have held that the assessment orders are void and bad in law and consequently, the assessment orders have

SERAJUDDIN & CO,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 227/CTK/2020[2006-07]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack17 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.224 To 230/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2020 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2009 04 To 2009-2010

For Appellant: None (written submission filed)For Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 153DSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide consolidated order dated 21.01.2022. Vide paragraph 45 of the said decision dated 21.01.2022 , it was held by this Hon'ble Bench as under: “45. Since by the earlier part of this order, we have held that the assessment orders are void and bad in law and consequently, the assessment orders have

SERAJUDDIN & CO,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 228/CTK/2020[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack17 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.224 To 230/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2020 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2009 04 To 2009-2010

For Appellant: None (written submission filed)For Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 153DSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide consolidated order dated 21.01.2022. Vide paragraph 45 of the said decision dated 21.01.2022 , it was held by this Hon'ble Bench as under: “45. Since by the earlier part of this order, we have held that the assessment orders are void and bad in law and consequently, the assessment orders have

SERAJUDDING & CO,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 229/CTK/2020[2008--09]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack17 Aug 2022

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.224 To 230/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2020 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2009 04 To 2009-2010

For Appellant: None (written submission filed)For Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 153DSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide consolidated order dated 21.01.2022. Vide paragraph 45 of the said decision dated 21.01.2022 , it was held by this Hon'ble Bench as under: “45. Since by the earlier part of this order, we have held that the assessment orders are void and bad in law and consequently, the assessment orders have

SERAJUDDIN & CO,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 230/CTK/2020[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack17 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.224 To 230/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2020 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2009 04 To 2009-2010

For Appellant: None (written submission filed)For Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 153DSection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide consolidated order dated 21.01.2022. Vide paragraph 45 of the said decision dated 21.01.2022 , it was held by this Hon'ble Bench as under: “45. Since by the earlier part of this order, we have held that the assessment orders are void and bad in law and consequently, the assessment orders have