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.

10 results for “disallowance”+ Section 88clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,736Delhi1,454Chennai470Bangalore338Ahmedabad301Hyderabad300Jaipur273Kolkata251Chandigarh171Pune162Surat117Cochin109Raipur104Indore91Amritsar89Visakhapatnam87Rajkot74Nagpur72Lucknow61Guwahati53Allahabad46Patna40Ranchi39Panaji39Agra27Jodhpur27Cuttack25SC22Dehradun10Jabalpur7Varanasi4ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1

Key Topics

Section 26314Section 1010Section 80I8Section 143(3)7Section 115B6Addition to Income6Disallowance5Section 37(1)4Section 684Section 36(1)(va)

ACIT, NAINITAL vs. M/S. KUMAON MANDAL VIKAS NIGAM LTD., NAINITAL

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed as above

ITA 908/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 142Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)

88,523/- only on the reasoning that the same is more than the permitted limit by the Indian Country Corporation. No other reasoning was mentioned by the AO while disallowing this claim. The hilly terrain and adverse weather have not been factored out by the AO. The disallowance is adhoc. Similar claims were neither disallowed nor were sustained

ACIT, CIRCLE- 3, NAINITAL vs. KUMAON MANDAL VIKAS NIGAM LTD., NAINITAL

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed as above

4
Permanent Establishment2
Survey u/s 133A2
ITA 1200/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 142Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)

88,523/- only on the reasoning that the same is more than the permitted limit by the Indian Country Corporation. No other reasoning was mentioned by the AO while disallowing this claim. The hilly terrain and adverse weather have not been factored out by the AO. The disallowance is adhoc. Similar claims were neither disallowed nor were sustained

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

disallow deduction under section 80IC of the Act. 3. Before us, the submission of learned counsel for the assessee is two-fold. Firstly, learned PCIT has not exercised the powers under section 263 of the Act independently, but at the behest of a subordinate authority. Secondly, at the time of assessment, the Assessing Officer has conducted full-fledged enquiry

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

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act cannot be made applicable to short deduction of tax at source a- z the disallowance made was deleted. Further the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case o* PCIT Vs. Future First Info Services Pvt. Ltd in ITA No. 195/2022 dated 14.07.2022 hadalso given the same proposition. The Id CIT(A) however

M/S. NANAK CHAND ASSOCIATES,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1419/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

section 269SS of the Act which prohibits any deposit or loan in cash exceeding Rs. 20,000/- from any person. Further except making claim that the amounts were received in cash, no evidence in the shape of confirmation etc. of Shri Madan Lal or Smt. Vimla Devi were produced before the lower authorities nor before us, to support the contention

SAMSUNG HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 873/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Dec 2023AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 234C

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act cannot be made applicable to short deduction of tax at source and the disallowance made was deleted. Further the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Future First Info Services Pvt. Ltd in ITA No. 195/2022 dated 14.07.2022 had Samsung Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. vs. DCIT (Int. tax.) also

DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN vs. M/S. SAMSUNG HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1315/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Dec 2023AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 234C

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act cannot be made applicable to short deduction of tax at source and the disallowance made was deleted. Further the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Future First Info Services Pvt. Ltd in ITA No. 195/2022 dated 14.07.2022 had Samsung Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. vs. DCIT (Int. tax.) also

SAHKUMBARI ASSOCIATES,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 261/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.261/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम Sahkumbari Associates, Acit Vs. C/O Matta Garg & Co., Circle-2, 15, Astley Hall, Dehradun. Dehradun, Uttarakhand. Pan No. Aagas1127F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)

88,590/-. While completing the assessment the Assessing Officer made disallowance u/s 37(1) of the Act in respect of business expenditure and Rs.22,500/- u/s 40A(3) in respect of cash paid for purchase of cooler in violation of provisions of section

SHREEVAAS INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CC, , DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 3076/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Malhotra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. N.S. Jangpangi, CIT/DR
Section 115BSection 69

disallowed the claim of the assessee. 4. We have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record. On a careful reading of section 115BBE, it is observed that prior to 01.04.2017, there was no restriction in section 115BBE in respect of set off of losses. Only through an amendment made to sub-section (2) of section 115BBE by the Finance

B R MORDEM SCHOOL SAMITI,PAURI vs. I T O, EXEMPTION WARD DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 27/DDN/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 Mar 2026AY 2016-17
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 250

section 10(23C)(iiiad) and the corpus\ndonation received with specific direction to develop infrastructure\nfacilities is a capital receipts. Therefore, Ld.AR requested that the\nassessee's society be grant the exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the\nAct since its annual receipts are less than Rs.1.00 crores which is\nthe threshold limit for claiming exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad