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 139Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Jaipur7Mumbai5Delhi4Cochin4Kolkata3Bangalore3Patna1Jabalpur1Chennai1

Key Topics

Section 69A5Section 1443Section 36(1)(va)3Section 139A3Addition to Income3Disallowance3Section 1472Section 143(2)2Section 682Unexplained Cash Credit

DISH INFRA SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(2), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed with above directions for statistical purposes

ITA 1617/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Dish Infra Services Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, Fc-09, Film City, Sector-16A, Circle-7(2), Noida, Uttar Pradesh New Delhi Pan: Aaacx1546R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Dibya Prashant Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Thakur, Sr. DR
Section 106Section 115BSection 139ASection 250Section 68Section 8

disallowance of Rs.26,88,147 under Section 68 of 1961 Act. The Assessing Officer without any justification discarded the books of account which were duly explained and also misapplied the relevant provisions of Section 139A

2
Double Taxation/DTAA2
Depreciation2

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

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6033/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Rana CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri D.C. Agarwal. Adv
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 24

disallowed the claim of deduction u/s.24(A) while assessing the income from house property on the ground that assessee has not produced any evidence. 5. Before the Ld. CIT(A), Kolkata, the assessee challenged that, ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law in passing ex-parte assessment order u/s.144 without having jurisdiction over the case on the assessee

MANGAT RAM,PANIPAT vs. ITO WARD-1, PANIPAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2564/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Mangat Ram, Vs Ito, Vikas Bhatta Co., Bko Kiwana, Ward -1, Panipat, Haryana-132103. Panipat. Pan-Agipr2718L Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Navjot Ahuja, Adv. Respondent By Shri Siddharth B.S.Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 11.09.2024

Section 147Section 69A

disallowance. Further, considering the detailed findings of the Ld. CIT(A), we do not see any reason to disturb the same. Accordingly, ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed". (Ref. Page 93-123 of J-PB) 17. As regards not mentioning name and addresses of purchaser on Cash bills, it is submitted that entire cash bills issued during

DCIT CIRCLE 27(1), NEW DELHI vs. UNITED DRILLING TOOLS LTD. , NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5913/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(va)

139A, First Floor, Antriksh New Delhi Vs. Bhawan, 22, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi PAN No:AAACU0098F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Salil Agarwal, Sr. Adv & Sh. Shailesh Gupta, Adv Respondent by Sh. Piyush Tripathi, Sr. Dr Date of Hearing 07/11/2024 Date of Pronouncement 06/12/2024 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM : This appeal is filed by the Department of Revenue