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.

3 results for “disallowance”+ Section 293clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi615Mumbai594Bangalore306Chennai200Kolkata175Ahmedabad115Jaipur114Indore56Raipur48Hyderabad46Amritsar42Lucknow40Pune37Chandigarh31Visakhapatnam26Surat25Nagpur24Jodhpur16Rajkot14Cochin12Patna10Panaji9Karnataka7Ranchi7Agra6Allahabad4Telangana4Cuttack3Dehradun3SC2Kerala1Jabalpur1Guwahati1Rajasthan1Calcutta1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 10(38)5Addition to Income3Section 402Disallowance2

ARSS INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CORPORATION CIRCLE- 1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 109/CTK/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2012-2013

For Appellant: Shri P.S.Panda/Kamal Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR
Section 40Section 43B

section 44AB of the Income tax Act, 1961. He submitted that the JVs have filed their income tax returns and the impugned interest payment has been shown as income and necessary taxes had been paid. He submitted that the impugned disallowance of interest u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act will tantamount to double taxation. Ld A.R. referred to the decision

JANARDAN NATH,DHENKANAL vs. ITO, DHENKANAL WARD, DHENKANAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 37/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.37/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Janardan Nath, Vs. Ito, Dhenkanal Ward, Chandan Bazar, Dhenkanal Dhenkanal स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan No. : Abcpn 4137 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri D.Parida/C.Parida, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

section of Income Tax Act and he could not produce any evidence except copy of acknowledgements for the A.Y.2004-2005 to 2008-2009 and 2011-2012 to 2013-2014. In addition to this, he had also submitted written submissions which was considered by the AO. Further, the AR of the assessee in response to the query of the AO submitted that

SHWETA AGARWAL,ROURKELA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ROURKELA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/CTK/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.140/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Shweta Agarwal, Vs Ito, Ward-1, Rourkela O-18, Civil Township, Rourkela Odisha-769004 Pan No. :Auhpa 4567 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Jaish Joshi, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Addl/Jcit(A)-2, Mumbai, Dated 17.12.2024 For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Only Issue In The Assessee’S Appeal Is Against The Actin Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Confirming The Disallowance Of The Claim Of The Assessee U/S.10(38) Of The Act In Respect Of 70,000 Shares Of Kailash Auto Sold On 14.11.2015 For A Consideration Of Rs.15,82,745/- & A Claim Of Exemption U/S.10(38) Of The Act To An Extent Of Rs.14,42,732/-. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Issue Is Squarely Covered By The Decision Of The Coordinate Bench Of The Tribunal In The Case Of Ridhi Bagaria, Passed In Ita No.76/Ctk/2023, Order Dated 18.05.2023. It Was Also Submitted That Very Same Issue Has Been Upheld By The Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jaish Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)

disallowance of the claim of the assessee u/s.10(38) of the Act in respect of 70,000 shares of Kailash Auto sold on 14.11.2015 for a consideration of Rs.15,82,745/- and a claim of exemption u/s.10(38) of the Act to an extent of Rs.14,42,732/-. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the issue is squarely