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.

16,767 results for “disallowance”+ Section 1(2)(a)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai22,559Delhi16,767Chennai6,555Kolkata6,156Bangalore5,802Ahmedabad2,561Pune2,288Hyderabad1,668Jaipur1,463Surat1,039Indore952Chandigarh833Cochin813Karnataka794Raipur659Rajkot617Visakhapatnam558Nagpur500Lucknow447Amritsar440Cuttack358Panaji241Agra214Telangana213Jodhpur206Patna190Ranchi187Guwahati179Calcutta164SC153Dehradun137Allahabad96Jabalpur87Kerala75Varanasi59Punjab & Haryana41Orissa19Rajasthan11Himachal Pradesh8A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN7Uttarakhand2Gauhati2Andhra Pradesh2ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Tripura1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1J&K1Bombay1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Addition to Income76Section 14A64Section 153A64Disallowance62Section 40A(3)36Section 143(3)35Section 271(1)(c)31Deduction25Depreciation23Section 80I

KUSUM DUBE,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 2(3), GURGAON

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7444/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishrakusum Dube Vs. Ito Ward 2(3) C/O Kapil Goel Adv. Gurgaon, Income Tax F-26/124 Sector 7, Rohini Department, Phase V, Delhi - 110085 Udyog Vihar, Sector 19, Gurugram, Haryana 122016 Haryana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aewpd9787R Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Dr. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 54F

disallowance made by the Ld. AO of Rs.105,67,271/- for Assessment Year 2015- 16. 2. The brief facts leading to the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 26.07.2015 declaring total income of Rs.66,070/- at Dibrugarh. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice under Section 143(2) was issued

Showing 1–20 of 16,767 · Page 1 of 839

...
21
Section 10B21
Section 13220

ACIT CIRCLE-1(2), NEW DELHI vs. ASSOCIATED TECHNO PLASTICS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7444/DEL/1992[1989-90]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Mar 2025AY 1989-90

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishrakusum Dube Vs. Ito Ward 2(3) C/O Kapil Goel Adv. Gurgaon, Income Tax F-26/124 Sector 7, Rohini Department, Phase V, Delhi - 110085 Udyog Vihar, Sector 19, Gurugram, Haryana 122016 Haryana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aewpd9787R Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Dr. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 54F

disallowance made by the Ld. AO of Rs.105,67,271/- for Assessment Year 2015- 16. 2. The brief facts leading to the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 26.07.2015 declaring total income of Rs.66,070/- at Dibrugarh. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice under Section 143(2) was issued

MANKIND PHARMA LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), MEERUT

In the result, the additional Ground No

ITA 2313/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 153(3)Section 270ASection 35Section 80GSection 80I

2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. Operation of section 37 and section 80G 30 I.T.A. No.2313/Del/2022 being mutually exclusive, a deduction of Rs.6,38,13,601/-[ being 50% of such contributions] was claimed under Section 80G of the Act which was wrongly disallowed

ACIT CC-14, DELHI vs. DELHI SPOT BULLION TRADING CO. PVT. LTD. , DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1965/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Anuj Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

2 lakhs of sales. There is no law which 9 Delhi Spot Bullion Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. mandates the assessee to keep its money in bank account. Even in case of cash sales prior to 8th November 2016, the assessee could have retained the sales realization in cash. g) Trading receipt cannot be added under section

ACIT,, NEW DELHI vs. M/S VATIKA LIMITED,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3597/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

VATIKA LTD.,GURUGRAM vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3708/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SEH REALTORS PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 791/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SEH REALTORS PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 790/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

ACIT,, NEW DELHI vs. M/S VATIKA LIMITED,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3594/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

VATIKA LTD.,GURUGRAM vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3712/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SEH REALTORS PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 792/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

M/S. U.K. PAINTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2379/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

VATIKA LTD.,GURUGRAM vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3709/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

M/S. U.K. PAINTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2378/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

M/S. U.K. PAINTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2376/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

M/S. U.K. PAINTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2377/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

ACIT,, NEW DELHI vs. M/S VATIKA LIMITED,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3596/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

VATIKA LTD.,GURUGRAM vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3711/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SEH REALTORS PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 789/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that

VATIKA LTD.,GURUGRAM vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3710/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

1. There is no evidence of payment of interest by M/s Vatika Ltd. to the lenders of the group, while making the addition. 2. The Department has assessed the transaction as transfer of land transaction and addition added interest too. 3. Such expenditure which is impugned addition has never been recorded. 4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that