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.

678 results for “disallowance”+ Section 40clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai7,378 Delhi6,511 Chennai2,346 Bangalore2,290 Kolkata1,972 Ahmedabad992 Hyderabad716 Jaipur678 Pune561 Indore397 Chandigarh310 Karnataka249 Raipur208 Surat208 Cochin204 Rajkot179 Nagpur152 Visakhapatnam145 Amritsar145 Lucknow129 Guwahati80 Ranchi71 Telangana68 Panaji66 Calcutta65 Allahabad65 Cuttack60 SC57 Patna57 Jodhpur50 Agra42 Dehradun34 Jabalpur30 Kerala30 Varanasi9 Orissa5 Punjab & Haryana5 Rajasthan4 Gauhati2 ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 J&K1 Tripura1 Uttarakhand1 Himachal Pradesh1 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Addition to Income76 Section 26373 Disallowance63 Section 143(3)59 Section 36(1)(va)41 Section 143(1)31 Deduction30 Section 153A28 Section 35A25 Section 148

ACIT, CIRCLE, BHARATPUR vs. M/S. JAGDAMBE STONE COMPANY, BHARATPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1171/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(2)Section 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) read with section 194C of the Act. IN this regard, he placed reliance on the judgement

M/S. RATAN CONDUCTORS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

Showing 1–20 of 678 · Page 1 of 34

...

23

Search & Seizure14

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

ITA 1259/JPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1259/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Ratan Conductors, Cuke A.C.I.T., Vs. H-377(B), Road No. 17, Vki Area, Circle-4, Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Aabfr 8166 P Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Ashok Kr. Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Jcit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 05/08/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 02/09/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Jaipur Dated 21/08/2019 For The A.Y. 2012-13 Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. Disallowance Of Interest Of Rs. 17,73,769/- On Account Of Non Tds:- That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Law & Facts In Confirming Disallowance Of Interest Of Rs.17,73,769/- Paid To M/S Barelays Investment & Loan (India) Ltd. (Rs. 298826/-) & M/S Future Capital (Rs. 1474943/-) On Account Of Non Deduction Of Tds Thereon By Invoking Provisions Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The It Act 1961. (A) The Assessee Firm Paid, Interest Of Rs. 2,98,826/- To Nbfc. M/S Barelays Investment & Loan (India) Ltd. & Rs.14,74,943/- To M/S Future Capital Another Nbfc. The Assessee Firm Raised Loan

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kr. Gupta (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 40

Section 40 (a) (ia) no disallowance could be made in the hands of assessee u/s 40 (a) (ia) so the disallowance

M/S AMRAPALI EXPORTS,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground No

ITA 454/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Bafna (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

disallowances pertaining to Sections 32, 40(a)(ia), 40A(3), 43B etc., of the Act. At times disallowance out of specific

DCIT, C-4, JAIPUR vs. M/S. JLC ELECTROMET PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 166/JPR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra GargieyaFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

Section 195 by Finance Act, 20212 with retrospective effect from 01- 04-1962. Therefore, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee on 26-11-2018 mentioning therein as to why the above expenses shall not be disallowed u/s 40

SHIV KRIPA HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3

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

ITA 443/JPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 40

disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) could be made. It is submitted that both the provisos to section 40(a)(ia) were

MODERN THREADS (INDIA) LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 198/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Madhukar Garg (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (JCIT)

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 245R(2)Section 40

section 40(a)(i) cannot be invoked for making the disallowance. In the facts and circumstances of the case the disallowance

M/S MODERN THREADS (INDIA) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 199/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Feb 2021AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Madhukar Garg (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (JCIT)

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 245R(2)Section 40

section 40(a)(i) cannot be invoked for making the disallowance. In the facts and circumstances of the case the disallowance

M/S. PRIME OCEANIC PVT. LTD. GANDHI NAGAR, UPLA SONAVA, SCHEME NO.8, ALWAR,ALWAR vs. ITO WARD-2(3), ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result, the disallowance so made is directed to be deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 652/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)

Section 195Section 40

disallowed due to contravention of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act r/w section 195 of the Act. On perusal

ASSOCIATED SOAPSTONE DISTRIBUTING CO PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 243/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 36(1)(ii)Section 37

disallowed said claim on ground that interest paid under section\n201(1A) would be penal in nature - Whether since tax was deducted by\nassessee on behalf of third party, interest charged on failure to remit\nsame within due date to government would be compensatory in nature\nand interest paid on delayed payment of TDS under section 201(1A)\nwas

M/S SILVEX & CO. (INDIA) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 901/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal(C.A.)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena (CIT) a

Section 145(3)Section 40

section 40(a)(ia) which in clear terms provides that disallowance u/s ,40(a)(ia) cannot be made if the assessee

M/S SILVEX & CO. (INDIA) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 900/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal(C.A.)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena (CIT) a

Section 145(3)Section 40

section 40(a)(ia) which in clear terms provides that disallowance u/s ,40(a)(ia) cannot be made if the assessee

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

sections, hence no appeal is maintainable.\nb)\nThe ground raised by the assessee that this is a loss as GST was not paid\nby the customers hence same is allowable expenditure as business loss. This\nhas never been recorded by the assessee in the audit report or in any accounts.\nHence assessee is claiming that his books of accounts

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

sections, hence no appeal is maintainable.\nb) The ground raised by the assessee that this is a loss as GST was not paid\nby the customers hence same is allowable expenditure as business loss. This\nhas never been recorded by the assessee in the audit report or in any accounts.\nHence assessee is claiming that his books of accounts

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOTA,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 199/JPR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

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

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

sections, hence no appeal is maintainable.\nb)\nThe ground raised by the assessee that this is a loss as GST was not paid\nby the customers hence same is allowable expenditure as business loss. This\nhas never been recorded by the assessee in the audit report or in any accounts.\nHence assessee is claiming that his books of accounts

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. DCIT, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 201/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 40A(2)(b)

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act as under:- S. MF Investment Redemption Dividend Interest No Days Income Disallowed In INR Date In INR Date 1 Birla Sunlife 50,000,000 23-Jun-11 50,000,000 28-Jun-11 44,587.39 5 61,643.84 15-Apr-11 2 Reliance

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. ACIT, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 291/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 40A(2)(b)

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act as under:- S. MF Investment Redemption Dividend Interest No Days Income Disallowed In INR Date In INR Date 1 Birla Sunlife 50,000,000 23-Jun-11 50,000,000 28-Jun-11 44,587.39 5 61,643.84 15-Apr-11 2 Reliance

M/S. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 744/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 40A(2)(b)

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act as under:- S. MF Investment Redemption Dividend Interest No Days Income Disallowed In INR Date In INR Date 1 Birla Sunlife 50,000,000 23-Jun-11 50,000,000 28-Jun-11 44,587.39 5 61,643.84 15-Apr-11 2 Reliance

M/S MORANI CARS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WARD-6, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 184/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Suhani Maharwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehara (Addl.CIT)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40ASection 40aSection 68

Section 40(a)(ia), the same is held to be retrospective in nature; therefore, the amount to be disallowed u/s 40

SHRI SATISH CHANDRA KATTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

ITA 437/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153A

40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This disallowance was\nsubsequently upheld by the CIT(A) during the first appellate proceedings.\nBefore us, the ld. AR of the assessee contended that the disallowance, if any,\nshould be restricted to 30% of the sum payable to the non-resident. The ld. AR\nreferred to the amendment introduced in Section

SIYARAM EXPORTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

ITA 440/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT-DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 50C

disallowing a sum of Rs. 12,16,500 (interest of Rs. 9,81,495 and\ncommission of Rs. 2,31,005) under section 40