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.

114 results for “disallowance”+ Section 801A(9)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai135Delhi114Hyderabad67Ahmedabad44Kolkata29Chennai23Pune19Jaipur17Bangalore16Indore15Rajkot11Patna10Nagpur9Chandigarh8Cuttack7Lucknow6Dehradun6Raipur5Guwahati4Jodhpur3Amritsar2Surat2Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 80I172Section 10A78Addition to Income73Disallowance72Section 143(3)71Deduction67Section 8051Section 115J42Section 153A42Section 143(1)

AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (LTU), CIRCLE-1 , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1008/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

9) vis a vis 80 IA (8), it is stated that theAO is not empowered to reallocate the expenses u/s 801A (8)- as held in Punjab Con-Cast Ltd. by Chandigarh Tribunal. The ld AR questioned as to how the GP ratio can be compared with FMV and that the AO is required to find out the corresponding

AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (LTU), CIRCLE-1, NEW DELHI

Showing 1–20 of 114 · Page 1 of 6

30
Section 271(1)(c)21
Penalty20

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2893/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

9) vis a vis 80 IA (8), it is stated that theAO is not empowered to reallocate the expenses u/s 801A (8)- as held in Punjab Con-Cast Ltd. by Chandigarh Tribunal. The ld AR questioned as to how the GP ratio can be compared with FMV and that the AO is required to find out the corresponding

AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (LTU), CIRCLE-1, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4716/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

9) vis a vis 80 IA (8), it is stated that theAO is not empowered to reallocate the expenses u/s 801A (8)- as held in Punjab Con-Cast Ltd. by Chandigarh Tribunal. The ld AR questioned as to how the GP ratio can be compared with FMV and that the AO is required to find out the corresponding

M/S. AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1009/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

9) vis a vis 80 IA (8), it is stated that theAO is not empowered to reallocate the expenses u/s 801A (8)- as held in Punjab Con-Cast Ltd. by Chandigarh Tribunal. The ld AR questioned as to how the GP ratio can be compared with FMV and that the AO is required to find out the corresponding

AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), CIRCLE-1 , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8081/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

9) vis a vis 80 IA (8), it is stated that theAO is not empowered to reallocate the expenses u/s 801A (8)- as held in Punjab Con-Cast Ltd. by Chandigarh Tribunal. The ld AR questioned as to how the GP ratio can be compared with FMV and that the AO is required to find out the corresponding

AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6332/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

9) vis a vis 80 IA (8), it is stated that theAO is not empowered to reallocate the expenses u/s 801A (8)- as held in Punjab Con-Cast Ltd. by Chandigarh Tribunal. The ld AR questioned as to how the GP ratio can be compared with FMV and that the AO is required to find out the corresponding

AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), CIRCLE-1 , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7366/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

9) vis a vis 80 IA (8), it is stated that theAO is not empowered to reallocate the expenses u/s 801A (8)- as held in Punjab Con-Cast Ltd. by Chandigarh Tribunal. The ld AR questioned as to how the GP ratio can be compared with FMV and that the AO is required to find out the corresponding

LOGICS POWERAMR PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASST DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6641/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2021-22 Logics Poweramr Private Vs. Asstt. Director Of Income Limited Tax, 1St Floor, Prestige Alpha No. 7, Sarswati Bhawan 1/4 Lalita Park, Laxmi Nagar 48/1, 48/2, East Delhi Laxmi Nagar Beratenaagrahara Begur, Delhi-110092 Hosur Rd. Uttarahalli Hobli, Pan No.Aadcl3204D Bangalore-560100 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80I

9. On observing the Form No.10CCB issued by the Accountant, the initial asst. year is 2009-10, whereas the assessee is engaged in power generation and the Accountant has issued Form No.10CCB on 25/6/2018 for the impugned asst. year. Further, on perusal of the Form No.10CB in which the Accountant has clearly shown that the claim of the assessee

DELHI TOURISM TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

ITA 5167/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 43B

9. By respectfully following the order of the Co-ordinate bench (supra) and finding the parity, we find no merit in the above grounds of appeals of the Revenue. Accordingly, Ground No.1 of the Revenue in ITA No.5920/Del/2019, ITA No.184/Del/2019 and 4737/De4l/2019 are dismissed. Prior period expenses 10. Ground No. 2 in ITA No.5920/Del/2019 and Ground No.4 in ITA No.4100/Del/2019

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

ITA 184/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 43B

9. By respectfully following the order of the Co-ordinate bench (supra) and finding the parity, we find no merit in the above grounds of appeals of the Revenue. Accordingly, Ground No.1 of the Revenue in ITA No.5920/Del/2019, ITA No.184/Del/2019 and 4737/De4l/2019 are dismissed. Prior period expenses 10. Ground No. 2 in ITA No.5920/Del/2019 and Ground No.4 in ITA No.4100/Del/2019

ACIT SPECIAL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM & TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

ITA 5922/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 43B

9. By respectfully following the order of the Co-ordinate bench (supra) and finding the parity, we find no merit in the above grounds of appeals of the Revenue. Accordingly, Ground No.1 of the Revenue in ITA No.5920/Del/2019, ITA No.184/Del/2019 and 4737/De4l/2019 are dismissed. Prior period expenses 10. Ground No. 2 in ITA No.5920/Del/2019 and Ground No.4 in ITA No.4100/Del/2019

ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM & TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. , NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

ITA 5920/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 43B

9. By respectfully following the order of the Co-ordinate bench (supra) and finding the parity, we find no merit in the above grounds of appeals of the Revenue. Accordingly, Ground No.1 of the Revenue in ITA No.5920/Del/2019, ITA No.184/Del/2019 and 4737/De4l/2019 are dismissed. Prior period expenses 10. Ground No. 2 in ITA No.5920/Del/2019 and Ground No.4 in ITA No.4100/Del/2019

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

ITA 4737/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 43B

9. By respectfully following the order of the Co-ordinate bench (supra) and finding the parity, we find no merit in the above grounds of appeals of the Revenue. Accordingly, Ground No.1 of the Revenue in ITA No.5920/Del/2019, ITA No.184/Del/2019 and 4737/De4l/2019 are dismissed. Prior period expenses 10. Ground No. 2 in ITA No.5920/Del/2019 and Ground No.4 in ITA No.4100/Del/2019

DELHI TOURISM & TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-10(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

ITA 5509/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 43B

9. By respectfully following the order of the Co-ordinate bench (supra) and finding the parity, we find no merit in the above grounds of appeals of the Revenue. Accordingly, Ground No.1 of the Revenue in ITA No.5920/Del/2019, ITA No.184/Del/2019 and 4737/De4l/2019 are dismissed. Prior period expenses 10. Ground No. 2 in ITA No.5920/Del/2019 and Ground No.4 in ITA No.4100/Del/2019

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

ITA 4100/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 43B

9. By respectfully following the order of the Co-ordinate bench (supra) and finding the parity, we find no merit in the above grounds of appeals of the Revenue. Accordingly, Ground No.1 of the Revenue in ITA No.5920/Del/2019, ITA No.184/Del/2019 and 4737/De4l/2019 are dismissed. Prior period expenses 10. Ground No. 2 in ITA No.5920/Del/2019 and Ground No.4 in ITA No.4100/Del/2019

BSC C&C JOINT VENTURE,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-61(1),, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2283/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 801A(4)(i)Section 80I

801A(7) of the Act. In para 7.3 the Ld. AO gave details of 9 projects containing therein name of the project, employer, nature of project and the amount of deduction claimed under section 80IA of the Act. According to the Ld. AO two of the contractee companies, namely Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. and Ircon International

BSC C&C JOINT VENTURE,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-61(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2284/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI G.S. PANNU (Vice President), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 40Section 801A(4)(i)Section 80I

9. As regards Ground No. 3 & 3.1 relating to disallowance of deduction of Rs. 66,14,49,535/- under section 80IA(4)(i) of the Act are concerned, Ld. Representative submitted that similar allegations were levelled by the AO in the case of the assessee for AY 2016-17 and the ITAT, Delhi vide its order dated 30.11.2022 in assessee

DLF CYBER CITY DEVELOPERS LTD.,GURUGRAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), GURUGRAM

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

ITA 4864/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshacit, Vs. Dlf Cyber City Developers Ltd, 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Shopping Mall Circle-1(1), Gurugram Complex, Arjun Marg, Dkf City, Phase-I, Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccd3572H Dlf Cyber City Developers Ltd, Vs. Addl. Cit, 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Shopping Mall Range-I, Complex, Arjun Marg, Dkf City, Gurgaon Phase-I, Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccd3572H

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. T. James Singson, CIT DR
Section 24Section 32(1)Section 801ASection 801A(4)

9. The controversy in this case pertains to the deduction under Section 80-IA of the Act being allowed to the extent of 'business income' only. The claim of the Assessee that deduction under Section 80-IA should be allowed to the extent of 'gross total income' was rejected by the Assessing Officer. ........A plain reading of Section 80AB

DLF CYBER CITY DEVELOPERS LTD.,GURUGRAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), GURUGRAM

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

ITA 4865/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshacit, Vs. Dlf Cyber City Developers Ltd, 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Shopping Mall Circle-1(1), Gurugram Complex, Arjun Marg, Dkf City, Phase-I, Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccd3572H Dlf Cyber City Developers Ltd, Vs. Addl. Cit, 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Shopping Mall Range-I, Complex, Arjun Marg, Dkf City, Gurgaon Phase-I, Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccd3572H

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. T. James Singson, CIT DR
Section 24Section 32(1)Section 801ASection 801A(4)

9. The controversy in this case pertains to the deduction under Section 80-IA of the Act being allowed to the extent of 'business income' only. The claim of the Assessee that deduction under Section 80-IA should be allowed to the extent of 'gross total income' was rejected by the Assessing Officer. ........A plain reading of Section 80AB

DLF CYBER CITY DEVELOPERS LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, GURGAON

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

ITA 3692/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshacit, Vs. Dlf Cyber City Developers Ltd, 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Shopping Mall Circle-1(1), Gurugram Complex, Arjun Marg, Dkf City, Phase-I, Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccd3572H Dlf Cyber City Developers Ltd, Vs. Addl. Cit, 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Shopping Mall Range-I, Complex, Arjun Marg, Dkf City, Gurgaon Phase-I, Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccd3572H

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. T. James Singson, CIT DR
Section 24Section 32(1)Section 801ASection 801A(4)

9. The controversy in this case pertains to the deduction under Section 80-IA of the Act being allowed to the extent of 'business income' only. The claim of the Assessee that deduction under Section 80-IA should be allowed to the extent of 'gross total income' was rejected by the Assessing Officer. ........A plain reading of Section 80AB