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.

931 results for “disallowance”+ Section 251clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,101Delhi931Bangalore318Chennai272Kolkata251Ahmedabad207Jaipur203Hyderabad180Pune159Cochin120Chandigarh99Indore93Surat84Raipur64Nagpur55Lucknow48Amritsar43Cuttack32Guwahati32Allahabad29Rajkot25Karnataka19Panaji19Visakhapatnam16Telangana10Jodhpur9Kerala8Ranchi8Jabalpur5Patna4Dehradun4Agra3SC3Varanasi2Rajasthan2Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Addition to Income69Section 26360Disallowance51Section 143(3)50Section 153A31Deduction28Section 6825Section 271(1)(c)24Section 4019Search & Seizure

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

disallowed on the ground of the same being contingent in nature. He further submitted that similar provision for increase in prices as at the end of the year was accepted and allowed in Hero MotoCorp Limited Vs. JCIT & DCIT Vs. Hero MotoCorp Ltd. ITA Nos. 1545/Del/2015 and 2424/Del/2015 (AY 2010-11) ITA No. 1609/Del/2016 and 914/Del/2016 (AY 2011-12) Page

Showing 1–20 of 931 · Page 1 of 47

...
19
Section 14718
Section 80I17

TRIVENI TURBINE LTD,NOIDA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 5(3)(1), NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1061/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay[Assessment Year: 2018-19]

Section 135Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 234ASection 35Section 37(1)Section 80GSection 80G(2)(a)

disallowed the deduction claimed by the appellant holding that donations forming part of CSR expenditure is not allowable as deduction under section 80G of the Act. 4. In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that the aforesaid issue is no longer re-integra and it has been held by various Benches of the Hon’ble Tribunal in the following cases

GE CAPITAL SERVICES INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 479/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishia N D Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sushma Singh, [CIT] – DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 45J

Section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by remanding the issue of deduction of Rs.12,62,01,895/- in respect of write off / reversal made out of provision for bad and doubtful debts to the Assessing Officer, completely ignoring that such powers as remained has been extremely taken away by way of Finance Act, 2001 with effect

VIKAS GLOBALONE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 26(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2498/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Piyush KamalFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT-D.R
Section 115JSection 37Section 80I

disallowance under section 14A could be made. Further, land was acquired and investment in land was made out of the capital and free reserves available to the assessee which were much higher. No expenses have been incurred to earn agricultural income. The agricultural income is incidental income to the assessee which have been received on account of acquisition

ASHISH DHAM,DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is treated as partly allowed for statistical

ITA 1953/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sridhar Dora, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 24Section 250Section 69

disallowing the interest on housing loan from income from house property. 5. That ld assessing officer without appreciating the correct facts of the case and giving proper opportunity of being heard and raising any query during the course of hearing is not justified in law and facts and circumstances of the case in making the addition

HV METAL ARC PVT. LTD.,NOIDA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1912/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. M.N. Kumar Sathe, Sr. DR
Section 144

disallowance of 2% out of the total expenses of Rs. 37,90,33,493/-, amounting to Rs. 75,80,669/-, was made. (2.1) Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who, vide aforesaid order dated 29.12.2017 dismissed the Assessee’s appeal, on the ground that no compliance was made to notices of hearings issued

ASIA SUGAR INDS.P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4795/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Tanpreet Singh KohilFor Respondent: Sh. Zahid Parvez, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

disallowance of expenses, be deleted. 5. With respect to ground No.2, the Learned A.R. submitted that during the course of search cash of Rs.58 lakhs was found and out of which Rs.44,50,000/- was seized. During the course of assessment proceedings, assessee was asked to give explanation about the cash found to which assessee inter alia, submitted that cash

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 961/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

disallowance made by the assessee u/s 43B of the Act was denied by the AO. The AO computed the disallowance out of R&D cess amounting to Rs.33.89 crores. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that at the outset, it may be noted that as per the provision of Land Research and Development, cess is imposed on import of technology

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1507/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

disallowance made by the assessee u/s 43B of the Act was denied by the AO. The AO computed the disallowance out of R&D cess amounting to Rs.33.89 crores. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that at the outset, it may be noted that as per the provision of Land Research and Development, cess is imposed on import of technology

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

SECTION 45, READ WITH SECTION 28(i), OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - CAPITAL GAINS, CHARGEABLE AS - ISSUE OF TAXABILITY OF SURPLUS ON SALE OF SHARES AND SECURITIES - CAPITAL GAINS OR BUSINESS INCOME - INSTRUCTIONS IN ORDER TO REDUCE LITIGATION CIRCULAR NO.6/2016 [F.NO.225/12/2016-ITA-II], DATED 29-2-2016 1. Sub-section (14) of section 2 of the Income

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

SECTION 45, READ WITH SECTION 28(i), OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - CAPITAL GAINS, CHARGEABLE AS - ISSUE OF TAXABILITY OF SURPLUS ON SALE OF SHARES AND SECURITIES - CAPITAL GAINS OR BUSINESS INCOME - INSTRUCTIONS IN ORDER TO REDUCE LITIGATION CIRCULAR NO.6/2016 [F.NO.225/12/2016-ITA-II], DATED 29-2-2016 1. Sub-section (14) of section 2 of the Income

SUDHAKAR ARORA,DELHI vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4584/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19]

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance under Section 36(1)(va) of the Act, since on his part the assessee had made payment within the due date prescribed under the respective Act and it was only on account of a technical glitches, there was a one day delay in credit of such amount to the respective account of the PF/ESIC authorities. 9. In the case

GURINDER MOHAN SINGH NINDRAJOG vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/322/2005HC Delhi30 Sept 2011

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 132Section 158Section 158BSection 68

Section 251 (1) (a), 263,154 and 147 of the Income-Tax Act. In the present case, where the CIT (A) is to decide the appeal, scope of his powers is stated in Station 251 (1)(a) ITA No.322/2005 Page 17 of 38 of the Act which empowers the CIT (A) to enhance the assessment as framed by the Assessing

GURINDER MOHAN SINGH NINDRAJOG vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA-322/2005HC Delhi30 Sept 2011
Section 132Section 158Section 158BSection 68

Section 251 (1) (a), 263,154 and 147 of the Income-Tax Act. In the present case, where the CIT (A) is to decide the appeal, scope of his powers is stated in Station 251 (1)(a) 2011:DHC:5139-DB ITA No.322/2005 Page 17 of 38 of the Act which empowers the CIT (A) to enhance the assessment

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue against the direction of the Ld

ITA 1106/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.K.Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Guajarat Guardian Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 4-7/C, Dda Shopping Centre, Circle-12(1), (Now Circle- New Friends Colony, 10(2), New Delhi Cr Building, Ip Estate, Pan: Aaacg1622K New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Guajarat Guardian Ltd, Circle-12(1), (Now Circle-10(2), 4-7/C, Dda Shopping Cr Building, Ip Estate, Centre, New Delhi New Friends Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaacg1622K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Meeta Singh CIT DR
Section 144Section 144CSection 14A

251 CTR 290 In view of the above, it is submitted that since deduction under sections 80IA of the Act is a deduction admissible for a certain term, the question whether or not the statutory conditions precedent to the admissibility thereof (including the question separate books of accounts are maintained and the basis of computing sales) are fulfilled

M/S GINNI GOLDLIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 673/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

disallowance and addition being the subject- matter of appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in such cases, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has been empowered under section 251

PERNOD RICARD INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the recalled matter of the appeal in ITA No

ITA 911/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 144C(13)Section 194HSection 40

disallowance has already been the restored to the file of the Assessing Officer and this alternative claim may also be filed before the Assessing Officer and there is no requirement to raise this issue by way of additional ground before the Tribunal. 5.2 We have heard the rival submission and perused the relevant metal on record. As all the facts

PERNOD RICARD INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the recalled matter of the appeal in ITA No

ITA 914/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 144C(13)Section 194HSection 40

disallowance has already been the restored to the file of the Assessing Officer and this alternative claim may also be filed before the Assessing Officer and there is no requirement to raise this issue by way of additional ground before the Tribunal. 5.2 We have heard the rival submission and perused the relevant metal on record. As all the facts

PERNOD RICARD INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the recalled matter of the appeal in ITA No

ITA 912/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 144C(13)Section 194HSection 40

disallowance has already been the restored to the file of the Assessing Officer and this alternative claim may also be filed before the Assessing Officer and there is no requirement to raise this issue by way of additional ground before the Tribunal. 5.2 We have heard the rival submission and perused the relevant metal on record. As all the facts

M/S. OIL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4664/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 154Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 36

disallowance u/s 14A in the AY 2007-08. The question is one of applicability of the principles to the facts in a given case. It has been a well-settled view that the ratio of any decision must be understood in the background of that case. What is of essence in a decision is its ratio and not every observation