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.

134 results for “disallowance”+ Section 154clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,208Delhi994Bangalore327Chennai251Ahmedabad217Jaipur203Kolkata191Pune178Hyderabad134Cochin114Chandigarh113Raipur77Indore75Surat69Visakhapatnam63Lucknow61Nagpur44Jodhpur44Rajkot36Guwahati36Amritsar25Allahabad24Patna20SC18Agra15Cuttack14Panaji12Jabalpur11Dehradun8Ranchi3Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 15495Section 143(1)81Section 143(3)75Disallowance65Addition to Income59Section 13243Section 153A40Deduction32Section 139(1)27Rectification u/s 154

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1084/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Sourabh Soparkar, Advocate Represented by Department : Dr. Narendra Kumar NFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 11/11/2025
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 68Section 80Section 801ASection 80GSection 92C

Section 14A(2) and (3) read with Rule 8D of the Rules or a best judgment determination, as earlier prevailing, would become applicable.\" Also, a similar view have been taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [2018] 91 taxmann.com 154 (SC). In the case before us, it is a matter

Showing 1–20 of 134 · Page 1 of 7

25
Section 14A24
Section 115J22

DURGAMATHA HOUSE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD -11(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 40/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Mar 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri T. Sunil Gowtham, DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowance under section 80P(2) was made in the original assessment order under section 143(1) of the Act and not under section 154

PRYSMIAN CAVI E SISTEMI S.R.L,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT (INT,TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1242/HYD/2024[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Jul 2025AY 2001-02
For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 263

disallowable expenses. Additions made over and above the estimated income are unsustainable.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": ["Section 143(3)", "Section 147", "Section 154

F5 NETWORKS INNOVATION PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 912/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Narender Kumar Naik
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 92C

154 of the Act or appeal under section 246 of the Act. The assessee is required to choose the right course of action diligently which depends upon different facts and circumstances. 25.5 Nevertheless, the object for making the adjustment in the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act or framing the assessment under section

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(1), HYDERABAD vs. VERTEX PROJECTS LLP (FORMERLY M/S VERTEX PROJECTS LTD) , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1187/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Acit,Circle-10(1) Vs. Vertex Projects Llp Room No.515, 5Th Floor, (Formerly M/S.Vertex A-Block, I.T.Towers, Projects Ltd.) A.C.Guards, #156-159, Paigah House Hyderabad. S.P.Road, Next To Pg College. Secunderabad-500 026. Pan : Aanfv0232C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sriram Seshadri, Ca Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar,Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.04.2023 O R D E R Per Shri Laliet Kumar, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Dated 16.03.2018 For The Ay 2014-15, On The Following Grounds :

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar,CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(3)Section 47Section 56Section 56(2)(viia)Section 56(2)(viiia)

disallowance computed under section 14A of the Act pertains to computation of income under the normal provisions of the Act and cannot be read into the provisions of section 115JB of the Act pertaining to levy of minimum alternate tax and there is no express provision in clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB of the Act to that

DURGAMATHA HOUSE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 659/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaassessment Year: 2020-21 Durgamatha House Building Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(1), Construction Co-Operative Hyderabad. Housing Society Limited, Hyderabad. Pan : Aacad6852C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar, Advocate Revenue By: Ms. Kavitha Rani, Sr-Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.12.2024

For Appellant: Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Rani, SR-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

disallowance under section 80P(2) of the Act in the original assessment order under section 143(1) of the Act, but not under section 154

NICHINO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY NICHINO CHEMICAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED NOW MERGED),HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 366/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.366/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Nichino India Private Dcit / Acit Limited (Formerly Nichino Vs. Circle-5(1) Chemical India Private Hyderabad Limited, Now Merged) Hyderabad [Pan : Aaecn5394B] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee By: Ms.Suvibha Nolkha, Ar राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue By : Shri D.Praveen, Dr सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/09/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement On: 25/09/2024

For Appellant: Ms.Suvibha Nolkha, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.Praveen, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 154

section 154 of the Act and due to the fact that the assessment proceedings were faceless, the assessee had no opportunity to put forth their case against disallowance

ANANTAPUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE STAFF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,ANANTAPUR vs. ITO., WARD-1, ANANTAPUR

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

ITA 1142/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.आआआ.आआ /Ita No.1142/Hyd/2024 (आआआआआआआआ आआआआ/Assessment Year:2016-17) M/S. Anantapur District Co- Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-1, Anantapur. Operative Staff Co-Operative Society Limited, Anantapur. Pan:Aaeaa0133B (Appellant) (Respondent) आआआआआआआआआआ आआआआआआ/Assessee Dr. D. Harish Chandra Rama, Ca By: आआआआआआ आआआआआआ/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Dr आआआआआआ आआ आआआआआ/Date Of 24/02/2025 Hearing: आआआआआ आआ 04/03/2025 आआआआआ/Pronouncement: आआआआ/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By M/S. Anantapur District Co-Operative Staff Co-Operative Society Limited (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 05.09.2024 For The A.Y. 2016-17. 2. The Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Association Of Persons (“Aop”), Not Filed Any Return Of Income (“Roi”) U/S.139 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ('The Act'). From The Information

For Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69ASection 80P

disallowance under section 80P(2) of the Act in the original assessment order under section 143(1) of the Act, but not under section 154

LQ PAY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1251/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1251/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Lq Pay India (P) Ltd Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 5(1) Pan:Aadcl8417G Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/03/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 40Section 40ASection 80J

section 154. 4. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the CPC disallowance of deduction under

APEX URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we herein direct the AO to vacate the disallowance of Rs. 13,200/- made by him. The Grounds of appeal Nos. 2 and 3 are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1778/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1778/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Apex Urban Infrastructure Vs. Dcit, Private Limited, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aafcp1027Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 13/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Company Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 12, Hyderabad, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 31/10/2019 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. The Assessee Company Has Assailed The Impugned Order Of The Cit(A) On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 37Section 37(1)

disallowance under section 14A of the Act is called for, had relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT [2018] 91 taxmann.com 154

VK WAREHOUSING ENTERPRISES,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee firm and the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of our observations recorded hereinabove

ITA 737/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.737/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aakfv3288R (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.881/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Vs. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.A. राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri P. Dhivahar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234BSection 271(1)(b)Section 40Section 69Section 69CSection 801B

154 of the Act, dated 10/11/2021, wherein he rectified the rate of tax applied and subjected the additions made under Section 68 and Section 69C of the Act to tax under Section 115BBE, enhancing the demand substantially. 5. On appeal, the CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee’s appeal. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance

GRANULES INDIA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1289/HYD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं / Ita No.1289/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11) Granules India Limited Vs. Dcit- Circle -2(1) 15Th Floor, Granules Tower Signature Tower, Botanical Garden Road Sy. No. 6(P) Of Kondaput Kondapur, Hyderabad – 500084 Sy. No. 37 Of Kothaguda Telangana Opp. Botanical Gardens Serilingampalluy, R.R. District Pan: Aaacg7369K Hyderabad-500084, Telangana (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 271(1)(c)

section 10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was claimed after reduction of foreign exchange loss of Rs. 9,44,39,942/-; hence, for the current A.Y. 2010-11 also it is prayed that the foreign exchange gain of Rs. 8,16,29,962/- (since rectified by order u/s 154 dt. 20/02/2018 to Rs. 6,06,08,866/-) shall

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, three appeals i

ITA 972/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

disallowed on a technical reason of delay in\nfiling of the Audit Report in Form No. 10B, which is due to\na reasonable cause and the same is beyond the control of\nthe appellant.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) has erred in observing that the appellant\nhas not given any reasonable cause for delay in filing the\nappeal by over

ORBIS REAL ESTATE FUND I,HYDERABAD (AUTH. REP.) vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 - 2, HYDERABAD

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

ITA 785/HYD/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Sai Sourabh K, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Narender Kumar Naik
Section 143(3)Section 154

section 154 for rectifying the mistakes apparent from record on account of tax liability computation which was not agreed upon and the Assessee has proceeded to file a appeal against the 154 order before the Honorable commissioner of income tax (Appeals). In this regard, the process of filing the appeal before the Honorable ITAT has been delayed and we request

CAPITAL FORTUNES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), IT TOWERS

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

ITA 724/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.724/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2020-21) M/S. Capital Fortunes Pvt. Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan:Aabcc5489P (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri C S Subrahmanyam, C.A. & Shri V Siva Kumar,Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 19/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri C S Subrahmanyam, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154

disallowance. It was submitted that these issues were also raised before CPC by way of rectification under section 154 of the Act, but CPC rejected

CELESTIAL BIOLABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 963/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S. RamraoFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 35Section 35(1)(i)Section 4

154 of the Act was passed after giving the opportunity of hearing to the assessee within the period of limitation. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. As clear from the above noted facts, the Assessing Officer has passed the original assessment order on 31.12.2010 disallowing the deductions claimed under sections

CELESTIAL BIOLABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 962/HYD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S. RamraoFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 35Section 35(1)(i)Section 4

154 of the Act was passed after giving the opportunity of hearing to the assessee within the period of limitation. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. As clear from the above noted facts, the Assessing Officer has passed the original assessment order on 31.12.2010 disallowing the deductions claimed under sections

CELESTIAL BIOLABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 961/HYD/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Apr 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S. RamraoFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 35Section 35(1)(i)Section 4

154 of the Act was passed after giving the opportunity of hearing to the assessee within the period of limitation. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. As clear from the above noted facts, the Assessing Officer has passed the original assessment order on 31.12.2010 disallowing the deductions claimed under sections

ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD vs. VK WAREHOUSING ENTERPRISES, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee firm and\nthe revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of\nour observations recorded hereinabove

ITA 881/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nShri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.AFor Respondent: \nShri P. Dhivahar, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234BSection 271(1)(b)Section 40Section 69Section 69CSection 801B

154 of the Act before the CIT(A),\nwho vide a separate order dated 28/02/2025, directed the AO to\napply the provisions of Section 115BBE only in respect of the\naddition made under Section 68 of Rs. 25,85,800/- and vacated\nthe application of Section 115BBE in respect of the disallowance

HARSHINI EPC PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 399/HYD/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri M. Naveen Kumar
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 199Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

section 143(3) of the Act for the assessment year 2013-14. 2. Though assessee has raised as many as six grounds however the effective grounds raised by the assessee read as under : “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance made of Rs.1,87,154