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.

123 results for “disallowance”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai15,338Delhi11,450Chennai5,168Bangalore4,918Kolkata4,451Ahmedabad3,164Pune3,148Hyderabad2,028Jaipur1,670Cochin1,400Chandigarh1,067Indore961Surat822Visakhapatnam717Raipur589Karnataka574Cuttack558Rajkot511Nagpur473Amritsar451Lucknow353Panaji293Jodhpur216Agra208Ranchi177Guwahati175Telangana168SC123Dehradun123Patna116Jabalpur100Calcutta92Allahabad91Kerala68Varanasi51Punjab & Haryana30Orissa11Rajasthan7Himachal Pradesh7A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN5H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Gauhati1J&K1Tripura1Uttarakhand1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1

Key Topics

Section 80I133Section 143(3)78Deduction58Disallowance53Addition to Income53Section 8041Section 26341Section 153A31Section 4024Section 40A(3)

COOPERATIVE CANE DEVE. UNION, LTD.,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, W- 1(3)(1), HARIDWAR, HARIDWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 158/DDN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun16 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] [Assessment Year: 2019-20] Co-Operative Cane Development Vs Ito Union Limited, Jawalapur, Ward-1(3)(1) Vill. & P.O. Jawalapur, Distt.- Haridwar Haridwar, Uttarakhand-249407 Uttarakhand Pan-Aaaic0152B Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Amar Pal Singh, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.07.2024 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Nfac/2018-19/10076885 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Intimation Order Dated 02.12.2020 Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, Assessee Filed The Letter & Stated That The Written Submission Made Be Considered. Therefore, Ld. Sr. Dr Was Heard & Proceeded To Decide The Appeal Filed By The Assessee On The Basis Of Material Available On Record. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is A Co-Operative Society Constituted By The State Government, Engaged In The Business Of Providing Credit Facilities To Its Members Who Are Agriculturists & Cane Growers Also, Marketing Of Agricultural Products & Purchase Of Agricultural Implements & Other Products Like Fertilizers, Insecticides Etc. Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 29.08.2019, Declaring Total Income At Nil & Claimed Deduction U/S 80P Of Inr 1,04,54,668/-. Thereafter, The Return Of Income Was Processed U/S 143(1), Assessed Total Income At Inr 1,04,54,668/- Where Deduction U/S 80P Was Not Provided To The Assessee Society.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

Showing 1–20 of 123 · Page 1 of 7

21
Section 14820
Natural Justice14
Section 143(3)
Section 250
Section 80P

disallowance of claim of deduction of Rs. 10454659/- u/s 80P, on the ground that this claim of deduction is an 'incorrect

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN vs. THDC INDIA LIMITED, TEHRI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as above

ITA 120/DDN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun31 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 115JSection 7Section 80I

deduction under section 80IA of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. 3. Whether the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance

LAKSAR CO OPERATIVE CANE DEV. UNION LTD.,LAKSAR vs. ITO, W- 1(3)(4), ROORKEE, ROORKEE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 121/DDN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun07 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250(5)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

disallowed claim of deduction u/s 8OP(2) claimed by assessee in its return. The deductions u/s 80P(2) as prescribed

MRS. DHOOMI DEVI,CHAMOLI vs. ITO, W-1(4)4, SRINAGAR, CHAMOLI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 149/DDN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] [Assessment Year : 2022-23] Mrs. Dhoomi Devi Vs Ito C/O-Hotel Udai Palace Near . Ward-1(4)4 Narsingh Temple Srignagar, Chamoli Joshimath Chamoli, Uttarakhand-246174 Uttarakhand-246443 Pan-Adkpd6984B Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Revenue By Shri A.S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13.02.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.08.2024 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Nfac/2021-22/10329482 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 05.03.2024 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is An Individual & The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass For Reason I.E. “Large Investment In Immovable Property As Compared To The Total Income”. The Ao Than Passed The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144B On 05.03.2024 At A Total Income Of Inr 2,70,31,224/- As Against The Total Income Declared At Inr 29,45,000/- In The Return Of Income Filed By The Assessee.

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54FSection 54F(1)

deduction of INR 1,90,86,224/- u/s 54F of the Act which was disallowed by holding that the assessee

M/S. ALLIED GLASSES,ROORKEE vs. PR. CIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 3204/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2012-13 Allied Glasses, C/O Tilak Raj & Versus Principal Cit, Associates, Gandhi Vatika, Dehradun Roorkee. Pan: Aamfa7220L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Tilak Raj, Advocate Revenue By : Sh. N.S. Jangpangi, Cit/Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2023 Order Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal, Assailing The Order

For Appellant: Sh. Tilak Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. N.S. Jangpangi, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

deduction under section 80IC of the Act has been claimed on them. Being of the view that the interest income earned cannot be considered as part of the business profit, the Assessing Officer disallowed

CHAWLA AUTO CORPORATION,RUDRAPUR vs. A C I T CIRCLE-2(1)(1), HALDWANI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 140/DDN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80Section 80I

deduction u/s 80-IC of the Act and accordingly, he applied N.P. rate at 3.64% as declared in the immediately preceding year on the turnover of Unit-1 and disallowed

U C JAIN & SONS,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, WARD- 3, HARIDWAR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4204/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun29 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2012-13 Uc Jain & Sons, Vs Ito, Ward-3, C/O M/S. Rishabh Velveleen Ltd., Haridwar. 9Th Km. Haridwar Delhi Road, Jwalapur, Haridwar. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaahu1616A

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Poonam Sharma, Sr.DR
Section 234BSection 80I

disallowing deduction under Section 80IB(10) of Rs.46,48,743/-. 3. The assessee has travelled to CIT(A) by way of appeal

IMSI (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,DEHRADUN vs. JCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 53/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun26 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N.C. Upadhyay, CIT-DR
Section 234BSection 80Section 80I

disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80IC of the Act. 6. We find that the claim of deduction u/s 80IC

GRAND LEGACY,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 229/DDN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Grand Legacy Vs Dcit Khasra No.384 Min/New Circle-1, No.642K, Dehra Khas Dehradun Adjoining Lal Pul Patel Uttarakhand Nagar, Dehradun Uttarakhand -248001 Pan-Aaifg4885D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rajan Malik & Shri A.K. Kashyap Respondent By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 10.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12.03.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 19.09.2025 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), Nfac, Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Nfac/2017-18/10101141 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 26.03.2021 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 143(3A) & 143(3B) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Had Claimed Deduction U/S 80-Ic Of The Act Which Was Disallowed By The Ao For The Reason That The Assessee Has Not Fulfilled The Conditions Prescribed For Claiming Said Deduction & Initiated The Penalty Proceedings U/S 271A For Under Reporting As A Consequence Of Mis-Reporting Of Income. Thereafter, Ao Levied Penalty U/S 271A Of The Act Of Inr 67,820/- For Under Reporting By Invoking Clause (E) Of Sub-Section (9) Of Section 270A Of The Act.

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 274Section 80Section 80I

deduction u/s 80-IC of the Act which was disallowed by the AO for the reason that the assessee has not fulfilled

INSTITUTE OF CLINICAL RESEARCH INDIA SOCIETY,DEHRADUN vs. CIT(A), DEHRADUN

Appeal is allowed

ITA 45/DDN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Institute Of Clinical Research Vs. Commissioner Of Income India Society, Tax (Appeals), 1St Floor, Building No.1, Dehradun Treenetra Vihar, Near Kargt Chowk, Dehradun Pan :Aabai3710P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr

Section 11Section 12ASection 194Section 194JSection 2(15)Section 40

disallowed the assessee’s expenditure claim for not having deducted TDS thereupon to the tune of Rs.12,10,250/-, in the course

EXPRESS DRILLING SYSTEMS LLC,NOIDA vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION,, DEHRADUN

In the result ground number 2 of the appeal is dismissed

ITA 6630/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun04 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishiexpress Drilling Systems Llc, Vs. Dict International Taxation, C/O. Nangia & Co, Circle-1, Dehradun A-109, Sector-136, Noida Pan: Aabce6891R (Appellant (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Arora, CAFor Respondent: Shri N. C. Uppadhay, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 144CSection 201(1)Section 40

disallowable for non-deduction of tax at source, disallowed in its original return. In assessment proceedings, on 27th of March

U.C. JAIN & SONS,HARIDWAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, HARIDWAR

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

ITA 16/DDN/2020[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Aug 2023AY 2012-2013
Section 133Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 801Section 801BSection 801B(10)

disallowed the deduction only the basis of non submission of completion certificate but the appellant have sufficient grounds belief & bases

M/S. RASAYANA HOTEL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, UTTRAKHAND

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2717/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun24 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri V.P. Raoassessment Years: 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. N.S. Jangpangi, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 80I

disallowance of deduction u/s 80IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 7. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts

GAUTAM RESIDENCY HOTEL & BANQUET,DELHI vs. ITO, RISHIKESH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 546/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 546/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Gautam Residency Hotel & Banquet, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Rajiv Saxena & Co., Adv. & Solicitors, Ward-1(4)(1), 318, Pocket-D, Mayur Vihar-Ii, Rishikesh New Delhi-110091 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaifg0458J Assessee By : Sh. Rajiv Saxena, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. N. C. Upadhyay, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.09.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Saxena, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. N. C. Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 80I

disallowance of 75% of deduction claimed by the appellant is unsustainable in law. 2 Gautam Residency Hotel & Banquet 2. That

SAURAV MALIK,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 49/DDN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun24 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] [Assessment Year : 2017-18] Saurav Malik Vs Ito 100/2, Bell Road Clement Town 15A, Subhash Road, Near Hilton School, Dehradun Uttarakhand Uttarakhand-248002 Pan-Bdypm6527J Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Rajiv Sahini, Ca Revenue By Shri A.S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

Deductions under Chapter VIA- The AO disallowed deductions amounting to 75,74,040/- under Chapter VIA, including interest on housing

BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DDIT/ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ) CIRCLE-1, DEHRADUN

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

ITA 7/DDN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 Dec 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri V.P. Raoassessment Years: 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. N.S. Jangpangi, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 44C

disallowance of deduction of Education Cess. The assessee claimed deduction on account of education cess paid before thedue date of filingthe

CONVENTIONAL FASTNERS,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, HARIDWAR

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 6686/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun20 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.S. Rana, Sr. DR
Section 263Section 80I

disallowance of assessee’s claim of deduction under section 80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 4. Briefly, the facts

M/S. RASAYANA HOTEL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, UTTRAKHAND

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2718/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun26 Nov 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: The Ld. Cit (A) Was Partly

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 80I

disallowing the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s 80IC without there being any incriminating material having been found during the course

MB PETROLEUM SERVICES LLC,MUMBAI vs. DDIT, DEHRADUN

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

ITA 1828/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshmb Petroleum Services Llc, Vs. Ddit, Kirtane & Pandit, H-16, Circle-1, Saraswati Colony, Sitaldevi International Taxation, Temple Road, Mahim, Dehradun Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaecm2604H

For Appellant: Smt Shashi M. Kapila, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Mayank Kumar, JCIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 44B

disallowed by the ld AO u/s 37(1) of the Act in the draft assessment order which was upheld by the ld DRP. 11. The ld AO observed that the assessee has debited an expenses amounting to Rs. 1,05,362/- and Rs. 17,327/- being payment made to Utkal Auto without deduction

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DEHRADUN vs. HALLIBURTON OFF SHORE SERVICES INC , MAHARASHTRA

In the result, ground no.3 is allowed

ITA 241/DDN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun11 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.241/Ddn/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2021-22 बनाम Dy. Commissioner Of Income Halliburton Off Shore Services Inc.,Unit No.603, 6Th Floor, Tax, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, 13-A, Subhash Satellite Gazebo, East Wing,Guru Road, Hargovindji Marg,Andheri Mumbai, Navi Dehradun, Uttarakhand. Mumbai,Maharashtra. Pan No.Aaach5154M अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 19Section 194CSection 194JSection 250Section 40

deduction of tax at source u/s 194C of the Act instead of section 194J of the Act. The Ld. AO is seen to have disallowed