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 184clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi722Mumbai485Bangalore176Ahmedabad151Jaipur142Kolkata116Hyderabad94Chennai92Chandigarh75Raipur64Indore48Surat35Lucknow28Amritsar27Pune27Visakhapatnam23Nagpur17Cochin15Rajkot15Cuttack12Agra9Patna8Karnataka8Allahabad7Guwahati6SC5Jodhpur3Telangana3Dehradun3Jabalpur3Rajasthan2Panaji2Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 44B5Section 271(1)(c)4Section 143(3)3Section 2743Section 2712Deduction2Penalty2Natural Justice2

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 Anand Foods to be non-filing/submission of it’s Form 10CCB tax audit report on or before the prescribed due date. 4. Faced with this situation, the Revenue could hardly dispute that the assessee had filed/uploaded the above

M.B. PETROLEUM SERVICES LLC,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6608/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun05 Oct 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Smt. Shashi M Kapila, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mayank Kumar, Addl.CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 271GSection 40aSection 44BSection 44D

184/-. 8. Without prejudice to above and in law and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO erred in disallowing expense of Rs.11,660/- on the ground that they cannot be verified. 9. Without prejudice to above and in law and circumstances of the case, the ld. AO erred in disallowing the expense of Rs.274,500/- by treating

EKSHAD AHAMAD PATODI,U S NAGAR vs. ACIT(OSD), WARD-2(3)(5), KHATIMA

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

ITA 76/DDN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(3)

disallowed u/s 40A(3) of the Act. 4. The Ld. CIT-A) has sustained penalty contrary to facts and against law. 5. That the impugned order is bad in law and not in consonance with facts, and against the principles of natural justice.” 3. None appeared for the assessee even after the registry issued notices to the assessee. 4. Considering