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.

561 results for “disallowance”+ Section 40A(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi561Mumbai495Chennai232Bangalore158Kolkata137Ahmedabad131Raipur112Jaipur109Hyderabad105Pune82Indore79Surat70Amritsar68Chandigarh59Visakhapatnam47Cuttack40Nagpur39Cochin38Lucknow37Rajkot36Agra27Jodhpur21Allahabad19Patna16SC14Dehradun14Guwahati13Varanasi5Ranchi5Jabalpur3Panaji1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Addition to Income82Disallowance66Section 40A(3)56Section 143(3)49Section 26343Section 153A42Section 14A35Section 43B25Section 143(1)22Deduction

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA/441/2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

2 to Sub-section (5) also refers to cash payment but that too is not to the employee, though undoubtedly for his benefit. 9. For the above reasons, we hold that cash payments by an assessee to his/its employees do not fall within the ambit of Section 40(a)(v) or Section 40A

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 40

Showing 1–20 of 561 · Page 1 of 29

...
22
Section 143(2)17
Depreciation14
Section 40a

2), disallowance on ground of excessive purchase price could not have been made under that section. Further, the Tribunal held that the transactions were entered by the assessee on account of commercial expediency and when the recipients had paid tax on payments received from the assessee company, disallowance could not be made by applying provisions of section 40A

ITO WARD-27(1), NEW DELHI vs. UNIVERSAL HEIGHTS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 8616/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Sudhir Kumarita No. 8125/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Universe Heights (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, 5G/1, Everest 46C, Chowringee Ward-27(1), Road, Kolkata-700071 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcu4605K

For Appellant: Sh. Saubhagya Aggarwal, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Monika Dhami, CIT-DR
Section 37Section 40A(2)(a)

Section 40A(2)(a), disallowed the excessive interest charged at the rate of 12% and hence, made a disallowance of Rs 4,48,39,232/-. 17. The ld. CIT(A) has restricted

UNIVERSE HEIGHTS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO WARD 27(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 8125/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Sudhir Kumarita No. 8125/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Universe Heights (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, 5G/1, Everest 46C, Chowringee Ward-27(1), Road, Kolkata-700071 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcu4605K

For Appellant: Sh. Saubhagya Aggarwal, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Monika Dhami, CIT-DR
Section 37Section 40A(2)(a)

Section 40A(2)(a), disallowed the excessive interest charged at the rate of 12% and hence, made a disallowance of Rs 4,48,39,232/-. 17. The ld. CIT(A) has restricted

M/S. TRINITY GLOBAL ENTERPRISES LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2122/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Sh. Rajkumar Gupta, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Subhra J. Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

section 40A(2)(b), onus had been cast upon Assessing Officer to bring on record comparable cases to demonstrate that transactions made by assessee with related parties were unreasonable and excessive - Further, CBDT Circular No. 6-P, dated 06.07.1968 states that no disallowance

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/257/2007HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4119-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/731/2008HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4104-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/1191/2008HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4105-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/246/2005HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4116-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/361/2008HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4126-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/842/2011HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4108-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/1183/2010HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4106-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/45/2005HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4122-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/247/2002HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4121-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/482/2008HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4127-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/251/2007HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4115-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/223/2002HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4120-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/50/2005HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4123-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/53/2000HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4113-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/253/2007HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

disallowed the increased amount of rent on the ground that this payment was in the nature of capital expenses. In this regard, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 2012:DHC:4124-DB ITAs 53/2000, 251/2007, 253/2007, 257/2007, 223/2002 247/2002, 45/2005, 50/2005, 1207/2005, 361/2008, 482/2008, 731/2008, 1191/2008, 1183/2010, 1198/2010, 842/2011 and 246/2005 Page 3 of 50 40A(2