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.

554 results for “disallowance”+ Section 40A(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi554 Mumbai492 Chennai232 Bangalore155 Kolkata133 Ahmedabad130 Raipur112 Jaipur108 Hyderabad103 Pune82 Indore79 Surat70 Amritsar68 Chandigarh56 Visakhapatnam47 Cuttack40 Nagpur39 Cochin38 Rajkot37 Lucknow31 Agra28 Jodhpur21 Allahabad19 Patna16 SC13 Guwahati13 Dehradun12 Varanasi5 Ranchi5 Jabalpur3 Panaji1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Addition to Income82 Disallowance65 Section 40A(3)56 Section 143(3)48 Section 153A47 Section 26343 Section 14A35 Section 43B25 Section 143(1)22 Deduction

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA/441/2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

disallowed. We do not think that the language of Sub-section (5) of Section 40A of the Act provides for or permits

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

Showing 1–20 of 554 · Page 1 of 28

...

21

Section 143(2)17

40a(ia) of the Act for failure to deduct TDS thereon. 11. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.6,70,864/- on account of disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of legal & professional expenses for failure to deduct TDS. 12. Whether, on the facts and circumstances

SHAKTI SINGH GULIA,BAHADURGARH vs. ITO, WARD- 4, ROHTAK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 4618/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Dohare, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

disallowance made under Section 40A(3), the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). It was submitted I.T.A No. 6115/Del/2018 & 4618/Del/2019 3 before the CIT(A) that the assessee is engaged in trading of country liquor where the Government issues license for trading. The distilleries who manufactures country liquor are also licensed and approved and monitored by the Government

SHAKTI SINGH GULIA,BAHADURGARH vs. ITO, WARD- 4, ROHTAK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 6115/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Dohare, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

disallowance made under Section 40A(3), the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). It was submitted I.T.A No. 6115/Del/2018 & 4618/Del/2019 3 before the CIT(A) that the assessee is engaged in trading of country liquor where the Government issues license for trading. The distilleries who manufactures country liquor are also licensed and approved and monitored by the Government

SHIV SHAKTI TRADERS,GHAZIABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2877/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 40A(3)

section 40A(3) of the Act. Ld. AO, therefore, after giving Shiv Shakti Traders vs. ACIT 5 opportunity to the assessee passed the rectificatory order making the impugned disallowance

DEV BHUMI DOLD CHAIN PVT. LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed as above

ITA 3163/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40ASection 40A(3)

disallowance of Rs.11,74,499/- under section 40A(3) of the Act (Rs. 5,03,580/- as per para 4.1 and 4.13 of the assessment

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2835/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

5 have been completely ignored by the Ld.CIT(A) and GP rate has been applied whereas there is clear violation of section 40A(3) in this case. 3. Also, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the addition made on account of lumpsum disallowance

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2836/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

5 have been completely ignored by the Ld.CIT(A) and GP rate has been applied whereas there is clear violation of section 40A(3) in this case. 3. Also, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the addition made on account of lumpsum disallowance

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2559/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

5 have been completely ignored by the Ld.CIT(A) and GP rate has been applied whereas there is clear violation of section 40A(3) in this case. 3. Also, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the addition made on account of lumpsum disallowance

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2834/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

5 have been completely ignored by the Ld.CIT(A) and GP rate has been applied whereas there is clear violation of section 40A(3) in this case. 3. Also, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the addition made on account of lumpsum disallowance

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2839/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

5 have been completely ignored by the Ld.CIT(A) and GP rate has been applied whereas there is clear violation of section 40A(3) in this case. 3. Also, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the addition made on account of lumpsum disallowance

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTONS ,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT CENTAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2555/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

5 have been completely ignored by the Ld.CIT(A) and GP rate has been applied whereas there is clear violation of section 40A(3) in this case. 3. Also, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the addition made on account of lumpsum disallowance

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION,GAUTAM BUDH NAGER vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 , NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2556/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

5 have been completely ignored by the Ld.CIT(A) and GP rate has been applied whereas there is clear violation of section 40A(3) in this case. 3. Also, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the addition made on account of lumpsum disallowance

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2558/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

5 have been completely ignored by the Ld.CIT(A) and GP rate has been applied whereas there is clear violation of section 40A(3) in this case. 3. Also, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the addition made on account of lumpsum disallowance

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS ,GAUTAM BUDH NAGER vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2554/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

5 have been completely ignored by the Ld.CIT(A) and GP rate has been applied whereas there is clear violation of section 40A(3) in this case. 3. Also, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the addition made on account of lumpsum disallowance

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2838/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

5 have been completely ignored by the Ld.CIT(A) and GP rate has been applied whereas there is clear violation of section 40A(3) in this case. 3. Also, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the addition made on account of lumpsum disallowance

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2557/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

5 have been completely ignored by the Ld.CIT(A) and GP rate has been applied whereas there is clear violation of section 40A(3) in this case. 3. Also, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the addition made on account of lumpsum disallowance

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2837/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

5 have been completely ignored by the Ld.CIT(A) and GP rate has been applied whereas there is clear violation of section 40A(3) in this case. 3. Also, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the addition made on account of lumpsum disallowance

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

In the result, -Appeal in ITA No

ITA 7553/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

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

5) does not mandate admission of a claim of Such nature which can be termed as mistake or omission in the original return of income, and is not legally sustainable. Further, there is no way to verify the implication arising out of the change of accounting system resorted by the appellant only for the limited purpose of claiming additional depreciation

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.

5) does not mandate admission of a claim of Such nature which can be termed as mistake or omission in the original return of income, and is not legally sustainable. Further, there is no way to verify the implication arising out of the change of accounting system resorted by the appellant only for the limited purpose of claiming additional depreciation