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.

34 results for “disallowance”+ Section 58clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,607Delhi3,881Bangalore1,328Chennai1,112Kolkata1,006Ahmedabad830Hyderabad554Jaipur496Indore338Pune292Chandigarh274Surat245Raipur227Cochin201Rajkot115Cuttack112Lucknow110Agra106Visakhapatnam101Amritsar90Karnataka86Nagpur64Allahabad63Panaji60Calcutta46Ranchi42Jodhpur40Telangana38Guwahati34SC33Dehradun22Varanasi22Patna20Jabalpur10Punjab & Haryana6Kerala6A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1Rajasthan1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 143(1)56Addition to Income34Section 4020Section 25019Section 143(3)18Section 15416Section 153C12Disallowance12Section 143(2)10Section 201(1)

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

58,27,184/- was disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee. We observe that ld. AO has neither brought any evidences on record to show that the transactions on account of expenditures are not genuine nor has provided any proper reason for making such allegation in the assessment order. 11. Ld. AO has also not rejected

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

Showing 1–20 of 34 · Page 1 of 2

8
Rectification u/s 1548
TDS7
ITA 39/GTY/2022[2019-20]Status: Heard
ITAT Guwahati
05 Apr 2023
AY 2019-20

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

58,27,184/- was disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee. We observe that ld. AO has neither brought any evidences on record to show that the transactions on account of expenditures are not genuine nor has provided any proper reason for making such allegation in the assessment order. 11. Ld. AO has also not rejected

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

58,27,184/- was disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee. We observe that ld. AO has neither brought any evidences on record to show that the transactions on account of expenditures are not genuine nor has provided any proper reason for making such allegation in the assessment order. 11. Ld. AO has also not rejected

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

58,27,184/- was disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee. We observe that ld. AO has neither brought any evidences on record to show that the transactions on account of expenditures are not genuine nor has provided any proper reason for making such allegation in the assessment order. 11. Ld. AO has also not rejected

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

58,27,184/- was disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee. We observe that ld. AO has neither brought any evidences on record to show that the transactions on account of expenditures are not genuine nor has provided any proper reason for making such allegation in the assessment order. 11. Ld. AO has also not rejected

TRIDENT INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2), GUWAHATI

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 254/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 10(26)Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 250Section 40Section 69C

58,02,792/- made under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. I.T.A. No. 254/GTY/2024 Trident Infraprojects Private Limited (b) Rs. 16,95,288/- under Section 69C of the Act. Regarding these additions, the findings of Ld. CIT(A) deserve to be extracted for the sake of background and reference: “4.5 As regards, the ground relating to disallowance

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, GUWAHATI vs. FORTUNE VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, GUWAHATI

In the result both the appeal of the Revenue and the cross objections of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 21/GTY/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati10 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble V.P (Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

disallowances. 10. We find no infirmity in the aforesaid act of the learned Tribunal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. "(emphasis supplied) 43. Gainful reference may also be made to the following observations made by the Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs IBC Knowledge Park (P) Ltd. [69 taxmann.com 108], which is as follows: "Materials such as books

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. ANUPAM NIRMAN PVT. LTD., GUWAHATI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 172/GTY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati22 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 172/Gty/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Anupam Nirman Private Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati Vs Limited 1St Floor, Kabita Mansion Rajgarh Link Road Chandmari Guwahati - 781003 [Pan : Aaica 4965 B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishor Jain, Fca Revenue By : Shri N.T. Sherpa, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20/12/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – Guwahati-2, Guwahati, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 27/03/2018, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “(I) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As On The Points Of Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 1,20,77,310/- On Account Estimation Of The Net Profit @ 7% Of Total Turnover For The Year. (Ii) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As On The Points Of Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 49,05,724/- On Account Of Disallowance Towards Interest Expense Against Loan Under Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. (Iii) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As On The Points Of Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 11,26,247/- On

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Jain, FCAFor Respondent: Shri N.T. Sherpa, JCIT
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 40Section 43B

disallowed alleging that the same has not been deposited with the due date. It remains an admitted fact that all these addition have been made only on the basis of financial statements filed by the assessee in the books of accounts regularly maintained and there is no whisper whatsoever, of any incriminating material. Considering the fact, that search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. SATYAM ISPAT (NORTH EAST) LIMITED, BANDERDEWA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for AY 2011-

ITA 86/GTY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati03 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

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

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250Section 68Section 80I

section 80IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the following subsidies: (i) Transport Subsidy: Rs.7,12,77,865/- The above disallowance was made by the Assessing Officer by holding that the above subsidies were not derived from the appellant's manufacturing activities.” 16. The above finding of ld. CIT(A) take note of all relevant details which are generally

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. SATYAM ISPAT (NORTH EAST) LIMITED, BANDERDEWA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for AY 2011-

ITA 87/GTY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati03 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

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

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250Section 68Section 80I

section 80IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the following subsidies: (i) Transport Subsidy: Rs.7,12,77,865/- The above disallowance was made by the Assessing Officer by holding that the above subsidies were not derived from the appellant's manufacturing activities.” 16. The above finding of ld. CIT(A) take note of all relevant details which are generally

MEGHALAYA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 360/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act shall not be deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head ‘Profits and gains of business or profession’. Since the year under appeal is AY 2016-17 therefore, the said amendment is applicable and therefore, the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act needs to be sustained only to the extent

MEGHALAYA ENERGY CORPORATION LIMITED, (GPF TRUST),SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 364/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act shall not be deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head ‘Profits and gains of business or profession’. Since the year under appeal is AY 2016-17 therefore, the said amendment is applicable and therefore, the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act needs to be sustained only to the extent

MEGHALAYA ENERGY CORPORATION LIMITED,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 363/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act shall not be deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head ‘Profits and gains of business or profession’. Since the year under appeal is AY 2016-17 therefore, the said amendment is applicable and therefore, the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act needs to be sustained only to the extent

MEGHALAYA POWER DISTRIBUTION CORPORATION LIMITED,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 362/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act shall not be deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head ‘Profits and gains of business or profession’. Since the year under appeal is AY 2016-17 therefore, the said amendment is applicable and therefore, the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act needs to be sustained only to the extent

MEGHALAYA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LIMITED,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 361/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act shall not be deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head ‘Profits and gains of business or profession’. Since the year under appeal is AY 2016-17 therefore, the said amendment is applicable and therefore, the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act needs to be sustained only to the extent

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. SHRI PARAN JYOTI SAIKIA, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 125/GTY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 250Section 69C

Section 250(4) of the Act by the undersigned, it is noted as under: 1. That, the Appellant is an Individual engaged in the business of construction in the state of Assam and Arunachal Pradesh and with regard to his construction business he has incurred contract expenses of Rs. 3,49,72,349/- and deducted TDS as applicable. 2. That

M/S. DREAM BUILDCON (P) LTD.,,GUWAHATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), GUWAHATI

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

ITA 25/GTY/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 May 2023AY 2012-13

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

Section 143(2)

disallowance of following expenditure:- (a) Interest on loan - Rs.23,20,402/- (b) Watch & Ward Expenses - Rs. 6,34,958/- (c) Electricity Expenses - Rs. 4,59,227/-. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee- company has filed its return of income electronically on 28.09.2012 showing total income at ‘NIL’ after claiming loss of Rs.3,58,100/-. The case

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. SHRI PANNALAL BHANSALI, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeal of the revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 428/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati31 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17

For Respondent: Shri P. S. Thuingaleng, ACIT
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

58,69,249/-, Ld. AO noted that assessee has claimed an amount of Rs.2,45,80,798/- as per schedule EI 5 ITA No.428/GTY/2019 & CO No. 12/GTY/2019 Pannalal Bhansali, AY: 2016-17 of his return as exempt income u/s. 10(38) of the Act towards LTCG. To examine the genuineness of claim of LTCG, Ld. AO called for details

GREENLAM INDUSTRIES LIMITED,TINSUKIA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-TINSUKIA, TINSUKIA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per the terms indicated above

ITA 402/GTY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

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

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 25Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 31(3)(a)

58-63 of Additional Paper Book] three judge bench of the Apex Court relied upon the earlier three judge bench decision in the case of CIT -vs.- Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC) (in the context of Section 31(3)(a) of the 1922 Act which corresponds to Sec. 251(1)(a) of the 1961 Act), where

LOTUS BROILER FARMING DIVISION,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

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

ITA 102/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.102/Gty/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Mody, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Sekhar Das, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(3)

58,320/- was disclosed in the return for the A.Y. 2018-19. Survey action u/s.133A conducted in the case of assessee on 15.02.2018 followed by selection of case for Complete Scrutiny and validly serving of statutory notices u/s.143(2)/142(1). Based on the details furnished by the assessee, the Assessing officer noticed that the assessee made payments of Rs.1.00