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.

100 results for “disallowance”+ Set Off of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai8,747Delhi6,028Chennai2,505Kolkata2,360Bangalore2,269Ahmedabad1,662Pune1,382Jaipur924Hyderabad894Chandigarh492Surat486Indore469Visakhapatnam371Cochin366Raipur362Cuttack278Karnataka277Rajkot271Nagpur196Amritsar194Lucknow180Agra117Guwahati100Ranchi97Jodhpur85Telangana77SC70Calcutta65Panaji62Patna56Allahabad50Dehradun41Jabalpur40Varanasi27Kerala22Orissa10Punjab & Haryana7Himachal Pradesh4Rajasthan4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1Andhra Pradesh1Tripura1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 80I74Addition to Income64Disallowance61Section 143(3)52Section 25052Section 6849Section 14846Deduction35Section 153C33Section 80

DIVYAMALA PRAKASH,GUWAHATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TEZPUR

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

ITA 70/GTY/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 Divyamala Prakash Ito, Ward-1, Tezpur Flat No. 6A, Syndicate Marble, Six Vs. Mile Radhanagar, Guwahati-784036. Pan: Bpmpp 6934 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Arun Bhowmick, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 02.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.01.2020 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) -1, Guwahati [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’].

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Arun Bhowmick, JCIT
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

disallowing the set of loss of Rs. 100542/- against income from business and profession and the ld. CIT(A) also

Showing 1–20 of 100 · Page 1 of 5

28
Section 36(1)(va)20
Depreciation17

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -II, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. ARIHANT INTERNATIONAL LIMITED , GUWAHATI

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

ITA 275/GTY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 43(5)Section 73

losses incurred in other non-eligible units. In the subsequent assessment framed for AY 2003-04, ld. AO’s successor had disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 10A of the Act by first setting

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

loss of this derivative transaction remained unverified, Ld. AO concluded to disallow the same. 6. From the initial submission of the assessee made for the first time before the Ld. CIT(A) and considering the material on record along with observations contained in the assessment order, Ld. CIT(A) exercised his powers u/s. 250(4) and directed the assessee

M/S. ADD CONSTRUCTION,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE -1, GUWAHATI

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 12/GTY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati22 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.12,13&14/Gau/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2020-21 M/S Add Construction….…........…..…………....................……….……Appellant C/O Rahul Raj Jain & Co., H.No.15, 1St Floor, Bye Lane-2, Shaktigarh Path, Bhangagarh, G.S. Road, Assam-781005. [Pan: Aaifa2627H] Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Guwahati ……….…............…….......................…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N.T Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 26, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 22, 2023 Order Per Manish Borad: All These Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2018-19 To 2020-21 Are Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] All Dated 31.01.2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Common Issue Involved In All These Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished

M/S. ADD CONSTRUCTION,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE -1, GUWAHATI

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 14/GTY/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati22 Aug 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.12,13&14/Gau/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2020-21 M/S Add Construction….…........…..…………....................……….……Appellant C/O Rahul Raj Jain & Co., H.No.15, 1St Floor, Bye Lane-2, Shaktigarh Path, Bhangagarh, G.S. Road, Assam-781005. [Pan: Aaifa2627H] Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Guwahati ……….…............…….......................…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N.T Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 26, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 22, 2023 Order Per Manish Borad: All These Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2018-19 To 2020-21 Are Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] All Dated 31.01.2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Common Issue Involved In All These Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished

M/S. ADD CONSTRUCTION,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE -1, GUWAHATI

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 13/GTY/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati22 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.12,13&14/Gau/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2020-21 M/S Add Construction….…........…..…………....................……….……Appellant C/O Rahul Raj Jain & Co., H.No.15, 1St Floor, Bye Lane-2, Shaktigarh Path, Bhangagarh, G.S. Road, Assam-781005. [Pan: Aaifa2627H] Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Guwahati ……….…............…….......................…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N.T Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 26, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 22, 2023 Order Per Manish Borad: All These Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2018-19 To 2020-21 Are Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] All Dated 31.01.2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Common Issue Involved In All These Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished

HEMENDRA NATH DEKA,GUWAHATI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 6/GTY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati05 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. Nos.5&6/Gau/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Hemendra Nath Deka…………....…………....….........…..........….…… Appellant House No.6, Dolphin Security & Advertising, Kamakhya Temple Road, Kamakhya Gate, Guwahati-781009, Kamrup, Assam. [Pan: Ajupd3564F] Vs. Acit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Ito, Ward-1(2), Guwahati)…...…..…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N. T. Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 05, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 05, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 09.12.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole & Common Issue Involved In Both The Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished

HEMENDRA NATH DEKA,GUWAHATI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 5/GTY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati05 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. Nos.5&6/Gau/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Hemendra Nath Deka…………....…………....….........…..........….…… Appellant House No.6, Dolphin Security & Advertising, Kamakhya Temple Road, Kamakhya Gate, Guwahati-781009, Kamrup, Assam. [Pan: Ajupd3564F] Vs. Acit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Ito, Ward-1(2), Guwahati)…...…..…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N. T. Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 05, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 05, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 09.12.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole & Common Issue Involved In Both The Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished

VISHASH AGARWAL,TINSUKIA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 39/GTY/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.39/Gty/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Vishesh Agarwal…………………..……....….........…..........….…… Appellant C/O Assam Pushpak Travel Agency, Makum Road, Tinsukia, Assam – 786170. [Pan: Aghpa7072R] Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Dibrugarh……………..….…..…...…..…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Soumendu Sekhar Das, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 20, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 20, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 17.03.2020 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Involved In These Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 308/GTY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Mar 2026AY 2016-17
Section 139(4)Section 139(9)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 72Section 80Section 80I

set off of the business loss of ₹43,33,71,531/- as\nthe same is not as per the provisions of Income Tax Act. Finally, the\nId. AO assessed the loss at ₹2,74,27,701/- and also initiated the\npenalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Id. AO finally\nimposed penalty vide order dated 29.11.2023, passed

M/S. SEEMA HOLDING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE -1, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 69/GTY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 67/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Seema Holding Pvt. Ltd. I.T.O. Ward-15(2), Kolkata Vs [Now, Acit, Central Circle-1, 89, Muktaram Babu Street Guwahati] Kolkata - 700007 [Pan : Aadcs5209H] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhary, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Chandan Dutta, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

disallowed the said loss of Rs.2,02,55,160/- in the assessment order framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dt. 23/12/2016. 15. The ld. A/R vehemently argued before us that the assessee has filed before the authorities below, the necessary details/evidence, proving the share transactions done on the stock exchange through listed brokers. The assessee has filed copies

M/S. SEEMA HOLDING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE -1, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 67/GTY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 67/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Seema Holding Pvt. Ltd. I.T.O. Ward-15(2), Kolkata Vs [Now, Acit, Central Circle-1, 89, Muktaram Babu Street Guwahati] Kolkata - 700007 [Pan : Aadcs5209H] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhary, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Chandan Dutta, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

disallowed the said loss of Rs.2,02,55,160/- in the assessment order framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dt. 23/12/2016. I.T.A. No. 67/GTY/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 I.T.A. No. 68/GTY/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 I.T.A. No. 69/GTY/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s. Seema Holding Pvt. Ltd. 9 15. The ld. A/R vehemently argued before us that the assessee

M/S. SEEMA HOLDING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE -1, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 68/GTY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 67/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Seema Holding Pvt. Ltd. I.T.O. Ward-15(2), Kolkata Vs [Now, Acit, Central Circle-1, 89, Muktaram Babu Street Guwahati] Kolkata - 700007 [Pan : Aadcs5209H] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhary, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Chandan Dutta, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

disallowed the said loss of Rs.2,02,55,160/- in the assessment order framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dt. 23/12/2016. I.T.A. No. 67/GTY/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 I.T.A. No. 68/GTY/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 I.T.A. No. 69/GTY/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s. Seema Holding Pvt. Ltd. 9 15. The ld. A/R vehemently argued before us that the assessee

H. M. CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 283/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati30 Aug 2022AY 2016-17
Section 143(2)

loss of Rs.72,96,768/- and set it off against other income of Rs. 52,79,954/-. The assessee has filed its written submissions wherein it has stated that it had shut down the cement manufacturing plant since Dec 2014. v It further states that since it had huge infrastructure of warehouses in its campus, the management decided to utilize

CARBON SPECIALITIES LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, GUWAHATI

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

ITA 26/GTY/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaassessment Year: 2009-10 Carbon Specialities Limited Dcit, Circle-2, Guwahati 53/10, Naya Ganj, Kanpur, Vs. Uttar Pradesh-208001. Pan: Aaacc 7924 J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri S.P. Bhati, Fca Respondent By : Shri P.S. Thuingaleng, Acit. Date Of Hearing : 27.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement :.. 28.04.2022 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.02.2020 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -2, Guwahati [Hereinafter Referred To As The Cit(A)] Relevant To Ay 2009-10. 2. The Only Issue Raised By The Assessee Is Against The Confirmation Of Disallowance Of Rs. 8,44,556/- By Ld. Cit(A) As Made By The Ao U/S 14A Of The Act Relating To Earning Of Exempt Income.

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Bhati, FCAFor Respondent: Shri P.S. Thuingaleng, ACIT
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

set aside 2 Carbon Specialities Limited A.Y. 2009-10 assessment proceeidngs , the ld. AO invoked the provisions of section 14A of the Act and made a disallowance of Rs. 13,01,126/- comprising Rs. 3,60,365/- under Rule 8D(2)(i)& Rs. 9,40,461/- under Rule 8D(iii) in the assessment framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s

JAI KAMAKHYA ALLOYS PRIVATE LIMITED,YRNIHAT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-SHILLONG, SHILLONG

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 331/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं.य/ Assessment Year:2016-17

disallowance has rightly been made by the Ld. AO. 7. I have heard the rival contentions and gone through the records. The purpose of depreciation is to give set off of the loss

SHIVDHAM INDUSTRIES (P) LTD.,,TINSUKIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

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

ITA 180/GTY/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

set off in the future years to ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication and to pass a speaking order on this issue. Further, the assessee is also directed to furnish all relevant details which it had mentioned in the written submission placed before ld. CIT(A) agitating ground no. 3 relating to disallowance of losses

M/S. ASSAM TEA CORPORATION LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 216/GTY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

disallowance of the loss claimed by the assessee. It is, further, observed that loss is dependent upon realization of the finished good from the green leaf assessee has plucked during the year. It is not a loss which has been carved out after getting the finished product. The complete details are not available in the order

M/S. ASSAM TEA CORPORATION LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 85/GTY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

disallowance of the loss claimed by the assessee. It is, further, observed that loss is dependent upon realization of the finished good from the green leaf assessee has plucked during the year. It is not a loss which has been carved out after getting the finished product. The complete details are not available in the order

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-SHILLONG, SHILLONG vs. THE MEGHALAYA COOPERATIVE APEX BANK LIMITED, SHILLONG

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the Cross

ITA 50/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sri Manomohan Das & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10(26)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 36Section 40

loss account of Rs.44,20,94,895/- has been considered for disallowance. However the appellant has claimed that the amount of Rs.38,83,13,323/- is not liable for TDS. Further the appellant has claimed that the exemption u/s 10(26) is not allowed by the AO. I find that the evidence for claiming exemption