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.

15 results for “disallowance”+ Section 271Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai54Mumbai43Bangalore32Jaipur27Delhi15Ahmedabad12Kolkata9Hyderabad9Cuttack7Raipur5Pune4Rajkot4Lucknow3Amritsar2Indore2Agra2Chandigarh2Varanasi1Dehradun1Jabalpur1Jodhpur1SC1Surat1

Key Topics

Section 44A19Section 271G16Section 271A14Section 270A13Addition to Income13Section 271(1)(c)12Penalty12Disallowance8Section 2746Section 271B

TAPI JWIL JV,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-62(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6722/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6722/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 4873/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Tapi Jwil Jv, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O C. S. Anand, Adv., Ward-62(4), 104, Pankaj Tower, 10, L.S.C. New Delhi Savita Vihar, Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadat3744J Assessee By : Sh. C. S. Anand, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Amitabh K. Sinha, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. C. S. Anand, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amitabh K. Sinha, CIT-DR
Section 271GSection 40A(2)(b)Section 928BSection 92D

disallow the expenditure, moreover with the structuring of the JV provisions of Section 40A(2)(b) are not attracted in the given facts and circumstances of the instant case. 9. Reliance is being placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Oriental Structural Engineers & Ors.(374 ITR 35) wherein it was held – “dismissing

5
Section 40A(2)(b)4
Business Income4

TAPI JWIL JV,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-62(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4873/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6722/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 4873/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Tapi Jwil Jv, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O C. S. Anand, Adv., Ward-62(4), 104, Pankaj Tower, 10, L.S.C. New Delhi Savita Vihar, Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadat3744J Assessee By : Sh. C. S. Anand, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Amitabh K. Sinha, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. C. S. Anand, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amitabh K. Sinha, CIT-DR
Section 271GSection 40A(2)(b)Section 928BSection 92D

disallow the expenditure, moreover with the structuring of the JV provisions of Section 40A(2)(b) are not attracted in the given facts and circumstances of the instant case. 9. Reliance is being placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Oriental Structural Engineers & Ors.(374 ITR 35) wherein it was held – “dismissing

JAINA MARKETING & ASSOCIATES,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, DELHI

Accordingly, Appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 224/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 132Section 153ASection 270ASection 270A(9)Section 270A(9)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

271A (A.Y 2017-18), 271AB (A.Y 2018-19) & 271AAB (A.Y 2018-19) respectively. 2. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of trading and distribution of mobile phones and accessories, mainly ITA No. 224 & Ors. Jaina Marketing & Associates, Delhi in Karbonn and Panasonic brand Mobile Phones. On 29/08/2018 a search and seizure operation

JAINA MARKETING & ASSOCIATES,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, DELHI

Accordingly, Appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 225/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 132Section 153ASection 270ASection 270A(9)Section 270A(9)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

271A (A.Y 2017-18), 271AB (A.Y 2018-19) & 271AAB (A.Y 2018-19) respectively. 2. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of trading and distribution of mobile phones and accessories, mainly ITA No. 224 & Ors. Jaina Marketing & Associates, Delhi in Karbonn and Panasonic brand Mobile Phones. On 29/08/2018 a search and seizure operation

JAINA MARKETING & ASSOCIATES,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, DELHI

Accordingly, Appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 226/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 132Section 153ASection 270ASection 270A(9)Section 270A(9)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

271A (A.Y 2017-18), 271AB (A.Y 2018-19) & 271AAB (A.Y 2018-19) respectively. 2. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of trading and distribution of mobile phones and accessories, mainly ITA No. 224 & Ors. Jaina Marketing & Associates, Delhi in Karbonn and Panasonic brand Mobile Phones. On 29/08/2018 a search and seizure operation

SMT. MADHU,MEERUT vs. ITO, MEERUT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1223/DEL/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Goel, Adv. & Sh. KKFor Respondent: Shri P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

disallowance u/s 40A(3) while computing the tax sought to be evaded because this addition does not establish concealment rather it is because of a deeming provision of the I.T. Act. Thus the AO has passed the penalty order after proper application of mind and after considering the relevant facts of the case. Further the case law cited

ACIT CIRCLE-16(1), DELHI vs. MAHASHIAN DI HATTI PRIVATE LIMITED , DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1484/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhasstt. Yr: 2017-18

Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 271ASection 44A

271A of the Act for underreporting in consequence of misreporting of income to the extent of Rs. 1,63,21,921/-. In penalty proceedings the Assessing Officer, rejecting the explanation furnished on behalf of the assessee, vide order dated 3 02.09.2021 levied a penalty of Rs. 1,13,76,592/- @ 200% of the tax payable

TALHA KHAN,MOHALLA AFGANAN PO AMROHA vs. ADDL.JT.DY.ACIT.NFAC, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC) DELHI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3419/DEL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumara.Yr. : 2017-18 Talha Khan, Vs. National Faceless Mohalla Afganan Po Amroha, Appeal Centre (Nfac), Amroha-244221 Delhi Uttar Pradesh (Pan: Ejspk7379K) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Vibhu Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 271FSection 69A

disallowance has been confirmed rejecting the explanation given by the assessee in this regard. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in iaw and being admitted fact on record, the AO has wrongly presumed cash deposits of Rs. 1,14,57,570 as deemed concealed or unexplained income under section 69A/115BBE through net taking

SHYAM SUNDER KANSAL,U.P vs. WARD 2(3)(2), U.P

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 139/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 50C

271A of the Act is prescribed. The addition has been made only on estimated basis and it is a settled law that penalty on ad hoc disallowance or addition made on estimate basis is not attracted. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Aero Traders Pvt. Ltd., reported in 322 ITR 316 (Del), has held that no penalty

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI RAMIT VOHRA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4373/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Kohli, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR

271A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 are initiated for non-maintenance of books of account as required by section 44AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Now the only option left is to complete the assessment u/s 144 of the Income-tax act, 1961, on the basis of the information available on record. The Hon’ble SC has elaborated

YAMUNA EXPRESSWAY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,GREATER NOIDA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- APPEAL, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2488/DEL/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2025AY 2006-07

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

Section 10Section 12ASection 147(3)Section 148Section 2Section 22Section 271ASection 271BSection 3Section 44A

271A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 20.11.2017 for Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a Local Authority and constituted in terms of section 3 of Uttar Pradesh Industrial Area Development Act, 1976. The Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority. vs. CIT(A) assessee is granted registration u/s 12AA

YAMUNA EXPRESSWAY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,GREATER NOIDA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- APPEAL, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2489/DEL/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalyamuna Expressway Cit(Appeal), Industrial Development Ghaziabad. Authority, Greator Noida, Vs. First Floor, Commercial Complex, Gautambudh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh-201308. Pan-Aaalt0341D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10(46)Section 12ASection 147(3)Section 148Section 271ASection 271BSection 3Section 44A

section 3 of Uttar Pradesh Industrial Area Development Act, 1976. The assessee is granted registration u/s 12AA of the Act in terms of the order of ld. 2 Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority. vs. CIT(A) CIT(E), Lucknow dated 08.05.2017 as a charitable institution carrying out activity of General Public Utility. The assessee was also notified as an authority

DCIT CIRCLE 61(1), DELHI vs. SUKHBIR SINGH CHABRA HUF, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 315/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.315/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2016-17 बनाम Dcit, Sukhbir Singh Chabra Huf Circle 61(1), Vs. 6, Rani Jhansi Road, Delhi. Motia Khan, Delhi. Pan No.Aaahs5683P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 44ASection 92C

disallowed alleging the arrangement as a camouflage. Hon'ble Court applying rationale of Vodafone case held that: "....in the absence of any material to pronounce on the genuineness of the transaction herein, the mere fact that what had been purchased had been leased out to the vendor or that vendor had undertaken to pay the hire charges on behalf

BRIJ RAJ SINGH RATHAUR,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE-41, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 315/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.315/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2016-17 बनाम Dcit, Sukhbir Singh Chabra Huf Circle 61(1), Vs. 6, Rani Jhansi Road, Delhi. Motia Khan, Delhi. Pan No.Aaahs5683P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 44ASection 92C

disallowed alleging the arrangement as a camouflage. Hon'ble Court applying rationale of Vodafone case held that: "....in the absence of any material to pronounce on the genuineness of the transaction herein, the mere fact that what had been purchased had been leased out to the vendor or that vendor had undertaken to pay the hire charges on behalf

SHRI BHIM PAL DAGAR,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, FARIDABAD

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

ITA 368/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Chandak, CA & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250(6)Section 271ASection 44ASection 68

disallowing 1/5th of all expenses debited in the audited profit and loss account for the year ending 31.3.2012 by confirming the suo moto addition of amounting to Rs. 293670/- without considering the fact that the accounts are duly audited by CA and AO does not have any justification and material on records to make such addition to the income