Search: disallowance | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

7,446 results for “disallowance”+ Section 23clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai8,589 Delhi7,446 Bangalore2,747 Chennai2,175 Kolkata2,083 Ahmedabad1,773 Pune1,365 Jaipur1,247 Hyderabad1,177 Chandigarh717 Indore639 Surat564 Raipur410 Visakhapatnam363 Cochin337 Rajkot290 Amritsar284 Cuttack265 Nagpur226 Lucknow207 Karnataka204 Agra145 Jodhpur142 Guwahati113 Ranchi101 Allahabad87 Telangana75 SC74 Panaji68 Patna55 Calcutta54 Dehradun36 Jabalpur35 Varanasi33 Kerala26 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN6 Punjab & Haryana5 Rajasthan4 Orissa3 Himachal Pradesh3 Andhra Pradesh2 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Tripura1 Uttarakhand1 Gauhati1 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1

Key Topics

Addition to Income78 Section 143(3)54 Disallowance48 Section 153A37 Section 14A34 Deduction28 Section 115J23 Section 153C22 Section 153D18 Section 132

M/S. IDEAL HITECH ENGINEERING EQUIPMENT (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3316/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

Section 143(2)Section 22Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)Section 24Section 251(2)

disallowance can be made in view of section 23(1)(c) of the Act. Without prejudice to the above and in an alternate

M/S. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Showing 1–20 of 7,446 · Page 1 of 373

...

16

Search & Seizure14

In the result appeal of the assessee with respect to ground No

ITA 5816/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishibharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent) Bharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vaxant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, SrFor Respondent: Sh. NC Swain, CIT DR (OSD)

Section 201Section 254Section 40

section 40(a)(ia), the payment made could not have been disallowed since the payees had ultimately paid tax on the said sum. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's plea and deleted the impugned disallowance. Page 23

MRS. RASHMI DHARIWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 11 and 12 of the appeal of the assessee are allowed accordingly

ITA 2900/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishirashmi Dhariwal, Vs. Acit, Aashray Farms, Sub Po, Circle-23(1), Sawan Public School, Bhatti New Delhi Mines, Asola Village, New Delhi Pan:Aappd9702P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sr. FR Meena, Sr. DR

section 23(1)(b) of the Act. Now, applying the above test to the facts of this case, we find a categorical finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal that the actual rent received by the assessee was more than the fair rent. Under the above circumstances, in view of the said finding of fact

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2478/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 40

disallowance reflects this settled principle. Nature of the Transaction—Watch as an "Award" vs. Contractual 2. Incentive: The assessee characterized the watch as an "award" for directing a super-hit film. However, awards and prizes are generally covered under section 10(23

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2479/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 40

disallowance reflects this settled principle. Nature of the Transaction—Watch as an "Award" vs. Contractual 2. Incentive: The assessee characterized the watch as an "award" for directing a super-hit film. However, awards and prizes are generally covered under section 10(23

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2480/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 40

disallowance reflects this settled principle. Nature of the Transaction—Watch as an "Award" vs. Contractual 2. Incentive: The assessee characterized the watch as an "award" for directing a super-hit film. However, awards and prizes are generally covered under section 10(23

DCIT,C-11(1), NEW DELHI vs. HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1982/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 40Section 40a

section 40A(2) of the Act. It would be pertinent to point out that similar disallowance made in the immediately preceding two assessment years, viz. AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 was also reversed by the Hon’ble Tribunal, following the aforementioned order of the Tribunal for assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09. While deciding the appeal

RELIGARE FINVEST LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIY, RANGE-21, NEW DELHI

In the result, for assessment year 2007-08 the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1947/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicialmember

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

Section 154 of the Act the AO has rectified the said disallowance by restricting it to Rs.50,29,087. The copy of the rectification order has been filed with your office vide our letter dated November 23

M/S RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, for assessment year 2007-08 the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6474/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicialmember

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

Section 154 of the Act the AO has rectified the said disallowance by restricting it to Rs.50,29,087. The copy of the rectification order has been filed with your office vide our letter dated November 23

ACIT, CIRCLE- 21(1), NEW DELHI vs. RELIGARE FINVEST LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, for assessment year 2007-08 the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2364/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicialmember

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

Section 154 of the Act the AO has rectified the said disallowance by restricting it to Rs.50,29,087. The copy of the rectification order has been filed with your office vide our letter dated November 23

ACIT,, NEW DELHI vs. M/S RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, for assessment year 2007-08 the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5872/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicialmember

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

Section 154 of the Act the AO has rectified the said disallowance by restricting it to Rs.50,29,087. The copy of the rectification order has been filed with your office vide our letter dated November 23

HERO MOTO CORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, DELHI

ITA 706/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Pal

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 145Section 1lSection 80ISection 92C

disallowance of deduction under section 80-IC to the extent of Rs.2,05,97,466 on account of interest income earned by the eligible unit on loan given at subsidized rates to the employees and loan given for providing working capital loan to vendors. Re: Non-allowance of depreciation on iease-hold rights in land 21. That the assessing officer

M/S. PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

ITA 2162/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 234BSection 36(1)(viii)Section 37

section 234B and 234C of the Act. This is consequential. 23. Ground No. 4 in AY 2014-15 relates to disallowance

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

ITA 2175/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 234BSection 36(1)(viii)Section 37

section 234B and 234C of the Act. This is consequential. 23. Ground No. 4 in AY 2014-15 relates to disallowance

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 7, NEW DELHI vs. PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

ITA 7433/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 234BSection 36(1)(viii)Section 37

section 234B and 234C of the Act. This is consequential. 23. Ground No. 4 in AY 2014-15 relates to disallowance

PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 19(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

ITA 7273/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 234BSection 36(1)(viii)Section 37

section 234B and 234C of the Act. This is consequential. 23. Ground No. 4 in AY 2014-15 relates to disallowance

HERO MOTOCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR

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

23 of 484 28. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in disallowing expenditure of Rs.9,01,80,410 incurred on account of fee paid to M/s G2 RAMS India Pvt Ltd. under section

DCIT, CIRCLE- 21(1), NEW DELHI vs. RELIGARE ENTERPRISES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed and cross-objection

ITA 7552/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi29 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia:Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Religare Enterprises Income-Tax, Circle-21(1), Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Rajlok New Delhi Building, 24-Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019 Pan :Aaacv5888N (Appellant) (Respondent)

23. In simple words, for section 14A of the Act there must be income actually earned in the first place and such income does not form part of ‘total income’, which is defined under section accrued (or deemed to be accrued) or arising, during the relevant previous year. As a necessary corollary, the aforesaid quoted expression refers to earning

RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 21(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, -Appeal in ITA No

ITA 547/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

23 ITA Nos. 4796/Del/2017 & ors. M/s Religare Finvest Ltd. Vs. DCIT Ad-hoc disallowances of support service fee and reimbursement of expenses 17. Ground No. 3 to 3.3 of the Assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 4796/Del/2017 (A.Y 2012-13) is regarding ad-hoc disallowances of support service fee and reimbursement of expenses. Brief facts of the case are that

RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 21(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, -Appeal in ITA No

ITA 4796/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: PendingITAT Delhi13 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

23 ITA Nos. 4796/Del/2017 & ors. M/s Religare Finvest Ltd. Vs. DCIT Ad-hoc disallowances of support service fee and reimbursement of expenses 17. Ground No. 3 to 3.3 of the Assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 4796/Del/2017 (A.Y 2012-13) is regarding ad-hoc disallowances of support service fee and reimbursement of expenses. Brief facts of the case are that