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.

107 results for “disallowance”+ Section 32clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai6,721 Delhi6,170 Bangalore2,049 Chennai1,921 Kolkata1,569 Ahmedabad1,488 Pune1,052 Hyderabad1,029 Jaipur840 Indore530 Chandigarh495 Surat367 Visakhapatnam317 Raipur309 Cochin290 Rajkot261 Karnataka244 Amritsar230 Cuttack216 Nagpur180 Lucknow123 Guwahati107 Agra105 Panaji86 Ranchi81 Allahabad79 Jodhpur68 SC64 Telangana60 Calcutta54 Patna52 Dehradun43 Kerala28 Varanasi25 Jabalpur20 Orissa6 Punjab & Haryana6 Rajasthan3 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2 Himachal Pradesh1 J&K1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Tripura1 Uttarakhand1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1

Key Topics

Section 80I136 Addition to Income73 Disallowance50 Section 25048 Section 6840 Deduction40 Section 153C39 Section 8039 Section 143(3)34 Section 153A

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(2), GUWAHATI vs. M/S. KISHLAY FOOD (P) LTD, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 232/GTY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Sainiassessment Year :2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 43BSection 80Section 80ISection 80l

disallowance pertaining to sections 32, 40(a)(ia), 40A(3), 43B etc., of the Act. At times disallowance out of specific

NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 03, GUWAHATI

Showing 1–20 of 107 · Page 1 of 6

21

Section 143(1)21

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 27/GTY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR

Section 80

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 90/GTY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 8/GTY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 03, GUWAHATI vs. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 28/GTY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD., GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 97/GTY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 89/GTY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD., GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 278/GTY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 5/GTY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 7/GTY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD., GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 98/GTY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-TINSUKIA, TINSUKIA vs. M/S. BROOKE BOND INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue and the cross-objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 99/GTY/2000[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Dec 2022AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble]

For Appellant: Smt. Harshita Jain on behalf of NituFor Respondent: Shri N.T. Sherpa, JCIT, D/R

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80G

section 37(4). I, therefore, delete the disallowance of Rs.5,26,969/- following decisions cited above. (10.5) The ad-hoc disallowance in my view is unwarranted. The A/O has not brought on record any material for such disallowance. In fact, he himself has written off that the disallowance is made on the basis of possibility that the expenditure

ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

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

ITA 43/GTY/2022[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act, the claim of Additional Depreciation is permissible in the case of an assessee engaged in the business of manufacturing or producing any article or thing. On the other hand, the claim of depreciation at Excess rate is different from the claim of Additional Depreciation. Since, the Assessing Officer had proceeded on a wrong

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

ITA 39/GTY/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act, the claim of Additional Depreciation is permissible in the case of an assessee engaged in the business of manufacturing or producing any article or thing. On the other hand, the claim of depreciation at Excess rate is different from the claim of Additional Depreciation. Since, the Assessing Officer had proceeded on a wrong

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2/GTY/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act, the claim of Additional Depreciation is permissible in the case of an assessee engaged in the business of manufacturing or producing any article or thing. On the other hand, the claim of depreciation at Excess rate is different from the claim of Additional Depreciation. Since, the Assessing Officer had proceeded on a wrong

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

ITA 37/GTY/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act, the claim of Additional Depreciation is permissible in the case of an assessee engaged in the business of manufacturing or producing any article or thing. On the other hand, the claim of depreciation at Excess rate is different from the claim of Additional Depreciation. Since, the Assessing Officer had proceeded on a wrong

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

ITA 38/GTY/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act, the claim of Additional Depreciation is permissible in the case of an assessee engaged in the business of manufacturing or producing any article or thing. On the other hand, the claim of depreciation at Excess rate is different from the claim of Additional Depreciation. Since, the Assessing Officer had proceeded on a wrong

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - DIMAPUR , DIMAPUR vs. M/S. UDIPTA ENERGY & EQUIPMENT PVT. LTD., ASSAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 45/GTY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati10 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं. /Ita No. 45/Gau/2017 (Ǔ""ȡ[""""[/ Assessment Year 2013-14) The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- M/S Udipta Energy & Equipment Tax, Circle, Dimapur, Nagaland Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C/O Phukan Nagar, Sivasagar, Assam-785640 (\ "Ȣ"ȡ"ȸ/ Assessee) (Ĥ×"ȡ"Ȣ- / Respondent) .. È"ȡ"Ȣलेखासं./Pan No. Aaacu5559K \ "Ȣ"ȡ"ȸ"Ȧओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri Rabindro Singh, Jcit Ĥ×""ȸ"Ȧओरसे/ Respondent By : Shri Uttam Kr. Borthakur, Advocate

For Appellant: Shri Rabindro Singh, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Uttam Kr. Borthakur, Advocate

Section 131Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 69C

32,595/- without appreciating the provisions of sections 69C of the Act. 4. Brief facts qua the issue are that the assessee has filed its return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, on 18.03.2014, declaring total income to the tune of Rs. 2,01,74,220/-. The AO noticed that during the post search proceedings, a seized

AGRIM INFRAPROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee i

ITA 222/GTY/2019[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 153ASection 250Section 68

disallowed. He has to verify if this provision has been included in the WIP or not. If included then it is to be adjudicated once it has not been allowed as a deduction then it is to be excluded from the WIP also. This expense be carried out after going through the detailed explanation of the assessee and ledger account

AGRIM INFRAPROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee i

ITA 219/GTY/2019[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 153ASection 250Section 68

disallowed. He has to verify if this provision has been included in the WIP or not. If included then it is to be adjudicated once it has not been allowed as a deduction then it is to be excluded from the WIP also. This expense be carried out after going through the detailed explanation of the assessee and ledger account