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.

7,444 results for “disallowance”+ Section 23(1)(a)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai8,710 Delhi7,444 Bangalore2,780 Chennai2,215 Kolkata2,115 Ahmedabad1,083 Jaipur895 Hyderabad775 Pune654 Indore460 Chandigarh453 Surat377 Raipur366 Rajkot245 Amritsar220 Nagpur207 Karnataka204 Cochin190 Lucknow184 Visakhapatnam184 Agra108 Cuttack103 Guwahati81 Jodhpur77 Telangana75 SC74 Allahabad73 Ranchi72 Patna59 Panaji59 Calcutta50 Varanasi33 Dehradun30 Kerala26 Jabalpur25 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN6 Punjab & Haryana5 Rajasthan4 Himachal Pradesh3 Orissa3 Andhra Pradesh2 Gauhati1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 Tripura1 Uttarakhand1 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1

Key Topics

Addition to Income70 Disallowance53 Section 143(3)45 Section 153C37 Deduction29 Section 14728 Section 6822 Section 14A20 Section 143(2)19 Section 37(1)

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

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

Showing 1–20 of 7,444 · Page 1 of 373

...

19

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

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

SURENDER KUMAR,HARYANA vs. ADIT,CPC, BANGALORE

ITA 1045/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 1045/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Surender Kumar, Vs Adit, M Sahu & Associates, Ca, House No. Cpc, 651, 1St Floor, Sector-10A, Near Union Bangalore Bank Of India, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agupk6911C Assessee By : Sh. M. R. Sahu, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.03.2022

For Appellant: Sh. M. R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect

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

23. Ground No. 4 in AY 2014-15 relates to disallowance of Rs. 7,92,643/- under section 14A and Rule 8D. The Ld. AO discussed this issue in para 17 page 10-12 of his order. On query the assessee submitted that it earned dividend income of Rs. 45.49 lacs exempt under section

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

23. Ground No. 4 in AY 2014-15 relates to disallowance of Rs. 7,92,643/- under section 14A and Rule 8D. The Ld. AO discussed this issue in para 17 page 10-12 of his order. On query the assessee submitted that it earned dividend income of Rs. 45.49 lacs exempt under section

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

23. Ground No. 4 in AY 2014-15 relates to disallowance of Rs. 7,92,643/- under section 14A and Rule 8D. The Ld. AO discussed this issue in para 17 page 10-12 of his order. On query the assessee submitted that it earned dividend income of Rs. 45.49 lacs exempt under section

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

23. Ground No. 4 in AY 2014-15 relates to disallowance of Rs. 7,92,643/- under section 14A and Rule 8D. The Ld. AO discussed this issue in para 17 page 10-12 of his order. On query the assessee submitted that it earned dividend income of Rs. 45.49 lacs exempt under section

FARIDABAD SERVICE STATION,HARYANA vs. ITO, WARD-30(4), DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1472/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect

HANS RUBBER & SPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,MEERUT vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, MEERUT

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 915/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect

VHS ENTERPRISES ,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-29(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1675/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect

VHS ENTERPRISES,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-29(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1676/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect

ASHIRWAD CARBONICS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMTIED,NEW DELHI vs. CIRCLE-3(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1721/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 139(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect

FLYING FABRICATION,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD 1(4), GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1545/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Flying Fabrication, Vs. Income Tax Officer, The Tax Chambers Advocates Ward-1(4) & Legal Advisors, C-177, Gurgaon Defence Colony, Lgf, New Delhi Pan :Aadff9825H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect

PUSHPA SHARMA,HARYANA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1473/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 139(1)Section 3Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect

RAMA ROLLER FLOUR MILLS ,MEERUT vs. ITO, WARD-1(1)(1), MEERUT

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1477/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 139(1)Section 3Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect

RAJAN BANQUET PVT.LTD.,MORADABAD vs. ACIT-1, MORADABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1427/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect

UNITED COFFEE HOUSE,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-52(4), DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 792/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi08 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. United Coffee House, Vs. Income Tax Officer, E-15, Connaught Place, Ward-52(4), Delhi Delhi Pan :Aaafu1260G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect

RSG SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-20(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 1478/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Soni, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR) and Ms. Rajeshjwari R., JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect

SONA FASHIONS INC,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-29(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1217/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Memberassessment Year: 2018-19 Sona Fashions Inc. Vs. Ito, H 9, Mohan Coop. Industrial Ward-29(5), Estate, B1, Mathura Road, New Delhi South Delhi, New Delhi Pan :Aacfs7353L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect

RAVINDRA NATH SAHNI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CPC, NEW DELHI

ITA 1784/DEL/2020[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1784/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Ravindra Nath Saini, Vs Acit, 51, Pashim Marg, Vsant Vihar, Cpc, New Delhi-110057 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abjps2875D Assessee By : Sh. A. K. Batra, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Shankar Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.07.2022

For Appellant: Sh. A. K. Batra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Shankar Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

23, 2018 M/S. UNIFAC MANAGEMENT SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATION CIRCLE 3 (2) , CHENNAI The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether the assessee is entitled to deduction in respect