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.

3 results for “disallowance”+ Section 143(1)(ii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai9,137Delhi6,655Kolkata2,386Bangalore2,356Chennai1,919Ahmedabad1,044Jaipur887Pune850Hyderabad823Indore662Surat581Chandigarh463Raipur391Rajkot321Amritsar293Visakhapatnam277Cochin248Karnataka248Nagpur223Lucknow222Cuttack129Panaji129Agra115Guwahati101Allahabad81Jodhpur75Patna70Telangana68Calcutta65Dehradun57Ranchi56SC38Varanasi38Kerala19Jabalpur16Punjab & Haryana14Himachal Pradesh3Orissa3Rajasthan3Gauhati2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 80I6Section 804Section 43D4Section 139(1)3Section 1392Section 362Section 1452Addition to Income2

Pr. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SHIMLA vs. HP HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (HIMUDA)

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/35/2019HC Himachal Pradesh22 Dec 2023

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA

For Appellant: Ms. Vandana Kuthiala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Vishal Mohan, Senior Advocate, with
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80Section 80ASection 80I

143(3) of the Act declined the deduction claimed by the assessee under Section 80 IB(10) of the Act in its revised return. This was for the reason that the assessee had not filed the original return within the permissible period under Section 139 (1) of the Act. The AO held that return of income was filed

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. THE KANGRA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/83/2018HC Himachal Pradesh07 Dec 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUSHIL KUKREJA

Section 145Section 36Section 43D

ii) to clause (vii a) of Section 36 (1) (3) Whether on the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble ITAT has erred in following the decision in the case of CIT vs. Punjab State Co-op Bank Ltd. Of A.Y. 2007-08, 2008-09 reported in 143 ITD 571 (Chd) as the Punjab State

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. THE KANGRA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/82/2018HC Himachal Pradesh07 Dec 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUSHIL KUKREJA

Section 145Section 36Section 43D

ii) to clause (vii a) of Section 36 (1) (3) Whether on the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble ITAT has erred in following the decision in the case of CIT vs. Punjab State Co-op Bank Ltd. Of A.Y. 2007-08, 2008-09 reported in 143 ITD 571 (Chd) as the Punjab State