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.

1 result for “disallowance”+ Section 10(27)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai6,904Delhi6,331Bangalore2,150Chennai1,861Kolkata1,576Ahmedabad1,424Pune1,199Hyderabad985Jaipur897Indore558Chandigarh509Surat433Raipur378Visakhapatnam297Cochin266Rajkot228Amritsar219Cuttack215Nagpur207Lucknow197Karnataka187Agra118Guwahati93Allahabad93Panaji74Ranchi70SC60Jodhpur56Calcutta49Telangana48Patna42Dehradun35Kerala20Jabalpur19Varanasi15Punjab & Haryana6A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN5Himachal Pradesh4Rajasthan4Orissa3Tripura1Gauhati1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 403

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JORHAT vs. M/S. SHYAMA POWER INDIA LTD.,

ITA/10/2019HC Gauhati01 Aug 2023

Bench: Honourable The Chief Justice Honourable Mrs. Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund Judgment Date : 02-08-2023 (S.P. Khaund, J) 1. Heard Mr. S. Chetia, Learned Senior Standing Counsel, Income Tax Department & Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, Learned Senior Counsel For The Respondent Assisted By Learned Counsel Mr. M. Sahewalla. 2. This Is An Appeal U/S 260A Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (The I.T. Act For Short) Against The Order Dated 14.11.2018 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ‘E’ Court

For Respondent: MR G N SAHEWALLA
Section 132Section 143Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 194CSection 2(22)(e)Section 260ASection 40

10. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, vide order dated 14.11.2018 passed in I.T.A. No. 07/Gau/2017 for the Assessment Year 2011-12 dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant and allowed the Rule 27 petition filed by the respondent assessee. 11. It was held by the ITAT that the assessment framed