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.

4 results for “disallowance”+ Section 11Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai62Delhi45Kolkata31Bangalore19Ahmedabad16Hyderabad14Lucknow11Amritsar9Chennai8SC8Indore6Jaipur4Dehradun4Pune4Nagpur4Cuttack3Karnataka3Visakhapatnam3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Calcutta2Jodhpur2Jabalpur1Cochin1Surat1Telangana1Chandigarh1

Key Topics

Section 80I13Section 115J4Deduction4Disallowance3Addition to Income3Section 143(3)2Section 802Section 682Section 115B2Business Income

ANAND FOODS,DEHRADUN vs. ITO WARD 2(2)(1), KASHIPUR

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 141/DDN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwalita No. 141/Ddn/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2021-22 Anand Foods, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Matta Garg & Co., Ward-2(2)(1), 15, Astley Hall, Dehradun, Kashipur, Uttarakhand-248001 Uttarakhand-244713 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ablfa3643B Assessee By : Sh. S. K. Matta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.01.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2021-22, Arises Against The Addl./Jcit(A), Mysore’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2025-26/1077083626(1) Dated 10.06.2025, In Proceedings U/S 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Heard Both The Parties At Length. Case File Perused.

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Matta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80I

disallowing it’s section 80IB(11A) deduction claim of Rs.79,97,988/-, we notice that the sole reason thereof appears

2
Cash Deposit2
Demonetization2

HARSIL GANGOTRI FRUITS PROCESSING AND MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED,RISHIKESH vs. CIT(A)-3, NOIDA, CIT(A) NOIDA AND ITO RISHIKESH

ITA 31/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Harsil Gangotri Fruits Vs. Cit(A)-3, Processing & Marketing Pvt. Noida Ltd., Plot No. 89, Nirmal Bagh Aam Bagh, Visthapit Pashulok, Rishikesh, Dehradun, Uttarakhand Pan :Aacch9436Q (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2017-18 Taknor Jhala Fruits Collection Vs. Cit(A)-3 & Processing Pvt. Ltd., Noida Plot No. 89, Nirmal Bagh Aam Bagh, Visthapit Pashulok, Rishikesh, Dehradun, Uttarakhand Pan :Aaect2878A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 68Section 80

section 80-IB(11A) deduction since engaged in collection, procurement, sorting, grading of apple produce. We accordingly are of the considered view that in light of CBDT’s recent Circular No.37/2016 that once the assessees/appellants are eligible for foregoing Chapter II deduction (supra), no such disallowance

TAKNOR JHALA FRUITS COLLECTION AND PROCESSING PRIVATE LIMITED,RISHIKESH, UTTRAKHAND vs. CIT(A)-3, NOIDA, CIT(A)-THREE, NOIDA AND ITO RISHIKESH

ITA 32/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Harsil Gangotri Fruits Vs. Cit(A)-3, Processing & Marketing Pvt. Noida Ltd., Plot No. 89, Nirmal Bagh Aam Bagh, Visthapit Pashulok, Rishikesh, Dehradun, Uttarakhand Pan :Aacch9436Q (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2017-18 Taknor Jhala Fruits Collection Vs. Cit(A)-3 & Processing Pvt. Ltd., Noida Plot No. 89, Nirmal Bagh Aam Bagh, Visthapit Pashulok, Rishikesh, Dehradun, Uttarakhand Pan :Aaect2878A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 68Section 80

section 80-IB(11A) deduction since engaged in collection, procurement, sorting, grading of apple produce. We accordingly are of the considered view that in light of CBDT’s recent Circular No.37/2016 that once the assessees/appellants are eligible for foregoing Chapter II deduction (supra), no such disallowance

ITO, WARD- 2(5), DEHRADUN vs. WINDLASS ENGINEERS & SERVICES PVT. LTD., DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 3664/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2014-15 Income-Tax Officer, Versus Windlass Engineers & Services Ward 2(5), Dehradun. Pvt. Ltd., 11A, Rajpur Road, Dehrdun. Pan: Aaacw6855C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Virendra Kalra, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Poonam Sharma, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2023 Order This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Against Order Dated 31.01.2018

For Appellant: Sh. Virendra Kalra, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Sharma, Addl. CIT
Section 80I

11A, Rajpur Road, Dehrdun. PAN: AAACW6855C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Virendra Kalra, CA Revenue by : Smt. Poonam Sharma, Addl. CIT Date of hearing : 19.06.2023 Date of pronouncement: 23.06.2023 ORDER This is an appeal by the Revenue against order dated 31.01.2018 of learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Haldwani for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. The major controversy