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.

7 results for “disallowance”+ Section 191clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai783Delhi740Bangalore291Chennai251Kolkata188Pune146Hyderabad124Ahmedabad93Jaipur91Surat90Indore89Chandigarh55Raipur48Cochin47Rajkot36Lucknow35Cuttack23Amritsar21Visakhapatnam18Guwahati14Karnataka14Allahabad13Nagpur12Ranchi10SC9Agra8Panaji8Dehradun7Jabalpur6Jodhpur4Telangana3Calcutta2Rajasthan2Himachal Pradesh2Patna2Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 153A24Section 40A(3)19Disallowance7Section 143(1)6Section 1326Section 40A6House Property6Addition to Income6Search & Seizure6

MANAV JOHAR,RISHIKESH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

ITA 7093/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun26 Nov 2020AY 2012-13
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 40ASection 40A(3)

191 ITR 667 (SC) have categorically upheld that the payments for acquisitions of stock- in-trade or raw materials are clearly covered under provision of section 40A(3) of the I.T. Act. In view of the above discussion addition of the AO is confirmed and appeal of the appellant on this ground is dismissed”. 2.2 Aggrieved, the assessee

MANAV JOHAR,RISHIKESH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

ITA 7092/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun26 Nov 2020AY 2010-11
Section 271(1)(c)4
Section 2743
Section 2712
Section 132
Section 143(1)
Section 153A
Section 40A
Section 40A(3)

191 ITR 667 (SC) have categorically upheld that the payments for acquisitions of stock- in-trade or raw materials are clearly covered under provision of section 40A(3) of the I.T. Act. In view of the above discussion addition of the AO is confirmed and appeal of the appellant on this ground is dismissed”. 2.2 Aggrieved, the assessee

MEENA JOHAR,RISHIKESH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

ITA 7097/DEL/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun26 Nov 2020AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 40ASection 40A(3)

191 ITR 667 (SC) have categorically upheld that the payments for acquisitions of stock- in-trade or raw materials are clearly covered under provision of section 40A(3) of the I.T. Act. In view of the above discussion addition of the AO is confirmed and appeal of the appellant on this ground is dismissed”. 2.2 Aggrieved, the assessee

MANSI JOHAR,RISHIKESH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

ITA 7099/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun26 Nov 2020AY 2012-13
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 40ASection 40A(3)

191 ITR 667 (SC) have categorically upheld that the payments for acquisitions of stock- in-trade or raw materials are clearly covered under provision of section 40A(3) of the I.T. Act. In view of the above discussion addition of the AO is confirmed and appeal of the appellant on this ground is dismissed”. 2.2 Aggrieved, the assessee

MANSI JOHAR,RISHIKESH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

ITA 7098/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun26 Nov 2020AY 2010-11
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 40ASection 40A(3)

191 ITR 667 (SC) have categorically upheld that the payments for acquisitions of stock- in-trade or raw materials are clearly covered under provision of section 40A(3) of the I.T. Act. In view of the above discussion addition of the AO is confirmed and appeal of the appellant on this ground is dismissed”. 2.2 Aggrieved, the assessee

MEENA JOHAR,RISHIKESH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

ITA 7095/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun26 Nov 2020AY 2010-11
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 40ASection 40A(3)

191 ITR 667 (SC) have categorically upheld that the payments for acquisitions of stock- in-trade or raw materials are clearly covered under provision of section 40A(3) of the I.T. Act. In view of the above discussion addition of the AO is confirmed and appeal of the appellant on this ground is dismissed”. 2.2 Aggrieved, the assessee

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