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.

11 results for “disallowance”+ Section 80Gclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai476Delhi292Pune199Ahmedabad133Kolkata133Bangalore120Chennai108Jaipur51Hyderabad44Chandigarh26Indore25Lucknow25Surat14Rajkot12Cuttack11Ranchi9Raipur7Visakhapatnam6Cochin6Jodhpur5Nagpur4Amritsar3Telangana2Allahabad1Dehradun1Guwahati1Punjab & Haryana1SC1Jabalpur1Karnataka1Agra1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 10A15Addition to Income11Disallowance10Deduction9Section 80G7Section 40A(3)6Section 143(2)6Section 143(3)6Section 80I6Section 143(1)

M/S. ORISSA MINING CORPORATION LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 375/CTK/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Shri P. Venugopal RaoFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80G

Disallowance of deduction under section 80G of Rs.7,52,58,750/- arbitrarily is unjust and bad in law. 5. For that

M/S. ORISSA MINING CORPORATION LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, BHUBANESWAR

5
Section 805
Depreciation5

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 92/CTK/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Shri P. Venugopal RaoFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80G

Disallowance of deduction under section 80G of Rs.7,52,58,750/- arbitrarily is unjust and bad in law. 5. For that

M/S. ORISSA MINING CORPORATION LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 93/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Shri P. Venugopal RaoFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80G

Disallowance of deduction under section 80G of Rs.7,52,58,750/- arbitrarily is unjust and bad in law. 5. For that

ORISSA MINING CORPORATION LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 333/CTK/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Shri P. Venugopal RaoFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80G

Disallowance of deduction under section 80G of Rs.7,52,58,750/- arbitrarily is unjust and bad in law. 5. For that

ORISSA MINING CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DICT, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 381/CTK/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Shri P. Venugopal RaoFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80G

Disallowance of deduction under section 80G of Rs.7,52,58,750/- arbitrarily is unjust and bad in law. 5. For that

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

section 80G but claiming under the head “business expenses”. It is well known fact that a prudent business man has to incur such miscellaneous expenses in the course of his business for the purpose of furtherance of his business activities. Considering the present case as also the necessity, which has been explained by the assessee, the disallowance

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), SAMBALPUR vs. MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD., SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 181/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.181/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2015-2016) Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Vs. M/S Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd At/Po: Jagruti Vihar, Burla, Dist-Sambalpur-768020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabcm 5188 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.M.Keshkamat, Cit Dr ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.S.Poddar, Fca

For Appellant: Shri S.S.Poddar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri S.M.Keshkamat, CIT DR
Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 17(2)(iii)Section 35ESection 80G

80G of the IT Act. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in accepting the plea of the assessee that such 'Grants to Schools" to the tune of Rs.21.85 crores was an employee welfare expense, without ascertaining from the assessee whether corresponding amount has been taxed as "perquisites

PARADEEP PHOSPHATES LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 560/CTK/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 Apr 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mahapatra/A.K.Sabat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saad Kidwai, CITDR

sections 4, 5 and 9 of the Income-tax Act. " In the instant case; the amounts have been paid towards purchase of raw material on principal to principal basis and the appellant has procured the goods from the non-resident seller at its own cost after making payments of custom duty, freight, handling charges etc. on CIF, basis

DCIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. ORISSA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

ITA 72/CTK/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Aug 2017AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Dillip Kumar MohantyFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan,CITDR
Section 801Section 80I

Section 80IA of the Act, has considered the submissions of the assessee and relied on the assesee’s own case, referred at page 6 of the order and the coordinate bench decision of Tribunal in assessee’s own case in ITA No.93/CTK/2007 for the assessment year 2003-04, which referred at para 4.2.1 and confirmed the action

M/S. ODISHA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

ITA 83/CTK/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Aug 2017AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Dillip Kumar MohantyFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan,CITDR
Section 801Section 80I

Section 80IA of the Act, has considered the submissions of the assessee and relied on the assesee’s own case, referred at page 6 of the order and the coordinate bench decision of Tribunal in assessee’s own case in ITA No.93/CTK/2007 for the assessment year 2003-04, which referred at para 4.2.1 and confirmed the action

DCIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. DISCOVERTURE SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

ITA 50/CTK/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Bibek Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR
Section 10ASection 10BSection 139(1)

disallowed deduction of Rs.3,67,15,136.19 claimed by the assessee u/s.10A and also did not allow deduction u/s.10B of the Act to the assessee. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). 5. The CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee and directed the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of exemption of Rs.3