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.

1,806 results for “disallowance”+ Section 11(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai15,417 Delhi12,727 Bangalore4,493 Chennai4,337 Kolkata3,834 Ahmedabad3,147 Pune2,976 Hyderabad2,039 Jaipur1,806 Chandigarh1,133 Surat1,101 Indore1,007 Cochin786 Raipur678 Visakhapatnam661 Cuttack562 Karnataka544 Rajkot521 Amritsar472 Nagpur430 Lucknow365 Agra222 Panaji221 Jodhpur204 Guwahati175 Ranchi161 Telangana142 Allahabad128 SC117 Patna113 Dehradun104 Calcutta88 Jabalpur60 Varanasi47 Kerala44 Punjab & Haryana21 Rajasthan11 Orissa10 Himachal Pradesh7 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN5 Gauhati2 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1 Andhra Pradesh1 Tripura1 Uttarakhand1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Section 26392 Addition to Income75 Section 143(3)67 Disallowance62 Section 14744 Section 36(1)(va)40 Section 14834 Section 43B31 Deduction28 Section 35A

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

ITA 962/JPR/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Sept 2025AY 2015-2016

For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40

11 and 12 of the Act. - Confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) 4. Disallowance u/s section 11 (2) and 11

SCHOLARS EDUCATION TRUST OF INDIA,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 1,806 · Page 1 of 91

...

25

Section 143(1)23

ITA 1225/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: Disposed

ITAT Jaipur

12 Nov 2025

AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT

Section 10Section 10(23)(vi)Section 11(5)Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 153(5)Section 2(41)

4. 10. In light of above discussions, we find that there is not sufficient material that is\nbrought on record to take a definitive view in the matter on withdrawal of approval\ngranted to the assessee u/s 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. The matter is accordingly set-aside\nto the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to examine

ACIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. MAHIMA SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR

In the result, all the grounds taken by the Revenue are dismissed and ground taken by the assessee society is allowed

ITA 105/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar (CIT)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 32

section 11 and deleting the disallowance relating to salary, foreign travel and treating contribution to Jaipur National University as application of income. The assessee society is in appeal against the order of ld CIT(A) for not treating the allowance of depreciation as application of income. 4

OM KOTHARI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 57/JPR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anish Maheshwari, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl.CIT

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 164(2)

11 of I.T. Act. 1961 and also held that the 'A' has made investment in violation of Sec. 13(1) (d) and thereby taxed the income u/s. 164(2) and(3). That the Ld. CIT(A) also erred in not allowing the ground. 4. That the Id A.O. grossly erred disallowing the donation Expenses

ARAVALI BUILDHOMES LLP,JAIPUR vs. AO CPC, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1154/JPR/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 80Section 80ASection 80I

4). The deductions claimed under section 80IB were disallowed relying upon section 80AC on the ground that return of income had not been filed within the time limit specified under section 139(1). The issue before the Delhi High Court pertained to order passed in the assessee's application under section 119(2)(6) of the Act seeking extension

RAJASTHAN OPHTHALMOLOGICAL SOCIETY, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 582/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. M.L. MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Hemang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR a

Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234A

disallowed the claim for accumulation under section 11(2), observing that the investment in prescribed modes under section 11(5) was not made during the relevant financial year. He therefore added Rs. 95,00,000/- to the total income of the appellant. The CIT(A)/NFAC confirmed the addition holding that the provisions of section 11(2) read with section

SMT. RENU JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 5(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the sole ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 96/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Shah (C.A.)For Respondent: Miss Chanchal Meena (JCIT)

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54F

disallowed the deduction claimed under section 54F of the Act stating that the Appellant have deposited the amount under Capital Gains Scheme after the due date of filing return of income and the same was upheld by the Ld. CIT(A). It was submitted that while making such addition, the Ld. AO and Ld. CIT(A) have not appreciated

DCIT, CIRCLE EXEMPTION JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. STATE INSTITUTE OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, JAIPR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 267/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Pooonia, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 288Section 44A

disallowed the deduction for the amount accumulated under provisions of section 11. 5.3.2 In this regard, as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, to claim exemptions u/s 11 and 12, conditions mentioned u/s 12A are to be fulfilled. The relevant part of the section 12A is reproduced hereunder. 12A [(1)] The provisions of section 11 and section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. NAVRATAN VIDHA MANDIR SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result appeal filed by the Department is dismissed and the C

ITA 201/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(d)Section 145(3)

4. Whether Ld. CIT(A) is justified in holding advance of Rs.1,62,86,091/- given to other trust cannot be treated as investment or deposit. While assessee trust failed to kept excess fund in the mode prescribed u/s 11(5), which is the violation of section 13(1)(d) of the Income-tax Act. 5. Whether

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION),WARD, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 67/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms Manisha Chandra, CIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

section 147 of the IT Act on 29.03.2013 at a total income of Rs. 20,28,203/- by making addition on account of net surplus as per income and expenditure account at Rs. 15,37,806/- and disallowance of claim of depreciation at Rs. 4,90,397/-. The AO has initiated proceedings u/s 147 on the basis of the order

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), WARD, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 68/JPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms Manisha Chandra, CIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

section 147 of the IT Act on 29.03.2013 at a total income of Rs. 20,28,203/- by making addition on account of net surplus as per income and expenditure account at Rs. 15,37,806/- and disallowance of claim of depreciation at Rs. 4,90,397/-. The AO has initiated proceedings u/s 147 on the basis of the order

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 66/JPR/2022[2005]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jun 2022

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms Manisha Chandra, CIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

section 147 of the IT Act on 29.03.2013 at a total income of Rs. 20,28,203/- by making addition on account of net surplus as per income and expenditure account at Rs. 15,37,806/- and disallowance of claim of depreciation at Rs. 4,90,397/-. The AO has initiated proceedings u/s 147 on the basis of the order

SETH RB MOONDHRA MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BANI PARK ,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION(1), JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 610/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Mrs. Prabha Rana, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary

Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 2

disallowance has been made despite the same has been accumulated in the manner as provided in section 11(5) of the Act read with Rule 17 of the Income Tax Rules. 3. Charging of tax @30% instead of applicable tax u/s 2 of Finance Act, 2013 @10% is bad in law and facts. 4

SMT. JYOTI AGARWAL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA nos

ITA 1373/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271A

disallowance of interest claim expenses. The AO then initiated the proceedings for levy of penalty under section 271AAB of the IT Act by issuing a show cause notice dated 27.12.2017. The AO while passing the penalty 3 ITA Nos. 1373(4)-18/JP/2018 Smt. Jyoti Agrawal, Kota. order dated 27st June, 2018 has levied the penalty under section 271AAB

SMT. INDIRA AGRAWAL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1384/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271A

disallowance of interest claim expenses. The AO then initiated the proceedings for levy of penalty under section 271AAB of the IT Act by issuing a show cause notice dated 27.12.2017. The AO while passing the penalty order dated 27th June, 2018 has 3 ITA Nos. 1384(4)/JP/2018 Smt. Indira Agrawal, Kota. levied the penalty under section 271AAB

RAJASTHAN STATE BHARAT SCOUT AND GUIDE,JAIPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 382/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT-DR

disallowing the appellant the benefit of accumulation of funds and investment u/s. 11(5) of the Income Tax Act. Hence, the order of the Assessing Officer is confirmed and appeal of the appellant is dismissed. However, the appellant may file condonation petition for delay before the Commission of Income Tax (Exemption). 7. In the result, the appeal of the appellant

RAJASTHAN STATE BHARAT SCOUT AND GUIDE,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HOLDING CHARGE OF ITO EXEMPTIONS, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 381/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT-DR

disallowing the appellant the benefit of accumulation of funds and investment u/s. 11(5) of the Income Tax Act. Hence, the order of the Assessing Officer is confirmed and appeal of the appellant is dismissed. However, the appellant may file condonation petition for delay before the Commission of Income Tax (Exemption). 7. In the result, the appeal of the appellant

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. M/S APOLLO ANIMAL MEDICAL GROUP TRUST, JAIPUR

In the result, the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 960/JPR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (C.A.) &For Respondent: Smt Runi Pal (Add.CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

section 11(5) and is not eligible for claim of exemption u/s 11. 3.2 Unreasonable payment of salary:- The details filed have revealed that the assessee has made payment of salary to persons specified U/s 13(2) of the Act as under:- S. Name of the person Amount Rs. No. ITA No. 960/JP/2018 & CO No.05/JP/2020 20 M/s Apollo Animal Medical

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-2, KOTA

In the result the appeal of\nthe assessee in ITA no 199/JP/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 197/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 43B

11.\nh. Total amount disallowable under section 43B (total of 11a to 11g) in schedule Ol.”\nThe appellant aggrieved with the disallowance made by the AO CPC, filed appeal\nwhich was decided on 30.07.2022 with the following remarks by the CIT(A),\nNFAC, New Delhi: -\n“5.3 Ground No 2: Disallowance under Section 43B of the Act: The appellant

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOTA,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-2, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the appeal of\nthe assessee in ITA no 199/JP/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 198/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 43B

11.\nh. Total amount disallowable under section 43B (total of 11a to 11g) in schedule Ol.”\nThe appellant aggrieved with the disallowance made by the AO CPC, filed appeal\nwhich was decided on 30.07.2022 with the following remarks by the CIT(A),\nNFAC, New Delhi: -\n“5.3 Ground No 2: Disallowance under Section 43B of the Act: The appellant