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.

481 results for “disallowance”+ Section 144C(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai652Delhi481Hyderabad109Chennai96Bangalore84Ahmedabad48Kolkata47Pune31Jaipur21Dehradun11Indore9Surat9Visakhapatnam8Rajkot8Cochin6Chandigarh6Amritsar3Lucknow2Raipur2Panaji1SC1Nagpur1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)74Addition to Income40Section 144C30Section 144C(13)23Disallowance23Transfer Pricing22Deduction17Section 26316Section 80I15Comparables/TP

FRESENIUS KABI ONCOLOGY LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-9(3), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 605/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Manish Agarwalfresenius Kabi Oncology Ltd. Income Tax Officer, B-310, Som Dutt Chamber, Ward-9(3), Bhikaji Cama Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110066. Pan-Aabcd7720L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

144C of the Act and therefore, is illegal and liable to be quashed. Fresenius Kabi Oncology Ltd. vs. ITO 3. That the AO/ TPO/ DRP erred on facts and in law in making an adjustment of Rs.105,07,00,000 to the arm's length price of 'international transactions' of sale of APIs and formulations, undertaken by the Appellant with

DEFSYS SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Showing 1–20 of 481 · Page 1 of 25

...
15
Section 14A13
Section 92C13
ITA 758/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 144CSection 153ASection 156Section 270ASection 271ASection 274Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)

3. That the so-called draft assessment order dated 31.03.2022 passed by the Ld. AO is in contravention of provisions of section 144C (1) of the Act and thus, subsequent orders passed by the Hon'ble DRP-1 i.e, order dated 23.12.2022 as well as order dated 20.01.2023 passed by the Ld, AO are void ab initio. 4. That

DEFSYS SOLUTIONS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1818/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 156Section 271ASection 274

section 143(3) r.w.s 144C of the Act and titled the order as “Assessment order”. 4. While framing the said order, the Assessing Officer concluded the assessment by observing at Para 13 as under: Total Income as per return of income filed 5,68,38,810 uls 139 of the IT Act on 30.03.2021 61,83,77,505/- Deemed total

ARIBA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2705/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(3)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

144C(13). 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO has erred in assessing the total income of the Appellant at IN 3,72,72,181 by making an Ariba India Pvt.Ltd. vs. ACIT addition amounting to INR 2,45,25,401 as against the returned income amounting

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1291/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 68

3) of section 143 or under section 144, in the cases referred to in sub-section (2), shall be made in a faceless manner as per the following procedure, namely:— (i) the National Faceless Assessment Centre shall serve a notice on the assessee under sub-section (2) of section 143; ……….. (iii) where the assessee— (a) has furnished his return

L.S CABLE INDIA PVT LTD ,REWARI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE13(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2572/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] L S Cable India Pvt.Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.28-31, Sector-5, Cirlce-13(1), Phase-Ii, Hsiidc Gc Bawal, New Delhi Rewari, Haryana-23501. Pan-Aabcl3621Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Gaurav Garg, Ca Respondent By Shri S.K.Jhadav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 01.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.05.2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

144C(13) of the Act on 24.08.2022 by making addition of Rs. 13,12,50,050/- as proposed by TPO in its order u/s 92CA(3) of the Act and the total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 6,79,40,935/-. 4. Aggrieved with the final assessment order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal

ROLLS-ROYCE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,DELHI vs. DCIT TP 3(2)(1), DELHI

The appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 252/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

disallowances of INR 6.96.67,905 to the total income filed the Appellant. Final assessment order is invalid 2. erred in passing the final assessment order dated 18 November 2021 by the Ld. AO u/s Section 143(3) r.w.s 144C

HONDA CARSS INDIA LTD ( A SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST OF HONDA MOTOR INDIA P.LTD ),GR. NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated above

ITA 629/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(15)(b)Section 92C

144C(13) and 144B of the Act is barred by limitation. B. Transfer pricing additions 10. That the TPO / DRP has erred in law in rejecting the transfer pricing documentation maintained by the Appellant and thereby re-determining the arm’s length price of the impugned transactions, without appreciating that the circumstances necessitating such redetermination as mentioned in sub-section

AERO CLUB,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-49(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2957/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Pradip Dinodia, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 270A

disallowance of employees contribution of provident fund/ESI u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s 2(24)(x) of the Rs. 4,24,39,963/-. In this case, besides other grounds, the assessee, has also taken the additional ground, that was filed on 8th May 2023, that the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C( 13) in pursuance

JONES LANG LASALLE PROPERTY CONSULTANTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI, INDIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 13(1), DELHI, INDIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Stay

ITA 3964/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2020-21 & Stay Application No.61/Del/2025 ( In Ita No. 3964/Del/2024 ) Assessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: S/Shri Nageshwar Rao and ParthFor Respondent: ShriDharam Veer Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(12)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 41Section 92

disallowance. 14. Ld. AO/ DRP has erred in computing the total income basis the Intimation dated 28.12.2021 issued under Section 143(1) of the Act, without validating the erroneous adjustments made therein. 15. Ld. AO has erred in allowing the credit of tax deducted at source ('TDS') only to the extent of INR 1,65,13,08,947/- while determining

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1024/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

3) read with section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act'), is illegal and bad in law.1 1.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned assessment having been completed on the basis of directions issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel (“DRP”) under section 144C(S) of the Act without judiciously and independently considering

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 901/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

3) read with section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act'), is illegal and bad in law.1 1.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned assessment having been completed on the basis of directions issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel (“DRP”) under section 144C(S) of the Act without judiciously and independently considering

MICROSOFT CORPORATION (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1863/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usmicrosoft Corporation (India) Vs. Dcit, Pvt. Ltd, Circle-16(1), 807, New Delhi House, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacm5586C Assessee By : Shri Nageswar Rao & Parth, Adv Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 22/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/02/2024

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao & Parth, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 153BSection 92C

disallowance have been incorporated and such other functions as may be required for the purposes of review and the term "review unit", wherever used in this section, shall refer to an Assessing Officer having powers so assigned by the Board. (4) The assessment unit, verification unit, technical unit and the review unit shall have the following authorities, namely:— (i) Additional

NIKON INDIA PRIVATE LTD. ,GURGAON vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1628/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia-

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)Section 154Section 92BSection 92C

3) r.w. Section 144C(13) of the Act. A TP adjustment of Rs. 49,97,50,823/- was however made in the final assessment order towards alleged international transactions of AMP alleged to be incurred for development of the brand owned by its foreign AE. The AO also made certain additions of Rs.2,40,28,377/- as disallowance

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

144C(13) read with section 153(3) of the Act, is illegal being barred by limitation, void ab initio and is liable to be quashed. 3. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in making transfer 2 I.T.A. No.2313/Del/2022 pricing adjustment of Rs. 21,92,40,676/- in relation to the specified domestic transactions undertaken

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NEW DELHI vs. NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical

ITA 2862/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Ms. Madhumita Royita Nos.2889 & 2890/Del/2018 (Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. S.K. Jadhav, CIT, DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

Section 143(3) and 143(3) read with 144C(3) of the of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “Act”) for Assessment Years 2009-10 and 2010-11. Since the issues involved in these appeals are inter- connected, hence, the appeals were heard analogously and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience

NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical

ITA 2889/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Ms. Madhumita Royita Nos.2889 & 2890/Del/2018 (Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. S.K. Jadhav, CIT, DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

Section 143(3) and 143(3) read with 144C(3) of the of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “Act”) for Assessment Years 2009-10 and 2010-11. Since the issues involved in these appeals are inter- connected, hence, the appeals were heard analogously and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience

NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical

ITA 2890/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Ms. Madhumita Royita Nos.2889 & 2890/Del/2018 (Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. S.K. Jadhav, CIT, DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

Section 143(3) and 143(3) read with 144C(3) of the of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “Act”) for Assessment Years 2009-10 and 2010-11. Since the issues involved in these appeals are inter- connected, hence, the appeals were heard analogously and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NEW DELHI vs. NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical

ITA 2863/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Ms. Madhumita Royita Nos.2889 & 2890/Del/2018 (Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. S.K. Jadhav, CIT, DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

Section 143(3) and 143(3) read with 144C(3) of the of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “Act”) for Assessment Years 2009-10 and 2010-11. Since the issues involved in these appeals are inter- connected, hence, the appeals were heard analogously and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience

DELHI CARGO SERVICE CENTER,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 9833/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, EmployeeFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT,DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(2)Section 271Section 37(1)Section 43B

disallowance is different from the basis on which the addition was made in the draft assessment order issued in pursuance of section 143(3) read with section 144C