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.

365 results for “disallowance”+ Section 70clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,155Delhi1,775Chennai536Bangalore386Jaipur365Ahmedabad336Hyderabad322Kolkata281Chandigarh203Pune177Raipur137Indore134Cochin130Surat117Rajkot89Visakhapatnam70Amritsar69Nagpur61Cuttack56Lucknow54Allahabad45Ranchi44Jodhpur37SC35Guwahati26Dehradun21Patna21Agra18Panaji8Varanasi8Jabalpur7

Key Topics

Addition to Income61Section 143(3)57Section 14743Disallowance30Section 25027Section 6827Section 14826Deduction26Section 14A25Section 43B

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

70,090/-.\n5.1.3 I have considered the reasoning of the assessing officer and the\nexplanation offered by the appellant. As per the provisions of section 43B,\nPayments in respect of taxes and Government dues can be claimed as\nexpenditure only on actual payment on or before the due date of return. This\nsection has been enacted to enforce.\nThis section

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

Showing 1–20 of 365 · Page 1 of 19

...
19
Section 271(1)(c)17
Natural Justice15

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

70,090/-.\n5.1.3 I have considered the reasoning of the assessing officer and the\nexplanation offered by the appellant. As per the provisions of section 43B,\nPayments in respect of taxes and Government dues can be claimed as\nexpenditure only on actual payment on or before the due date of return. This\nsection has been enacted to enforce.\nThis section

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

70,090/-.\n5.1.3 I have considered the reasoning of the assessing officer and the\nexplanation offered by the appellant. As per the provisions of section 43B,\nPayments in respect of taxes and Government dues can be claimed as\nexpenditure only on actual payment on or before the due date of return. This\nsection has been enacted to enforce.\nThis section

CAREER POINT LIMITED,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 242/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik (CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

disallowance of Rs. 2,21,70,790/- against the indirect expenses under rule 8D (2)(ii). The assessee earned the exempt income of Rs. 62,529/- of long term capital gains under Section

M/S RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 310/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80

70,76,173 Nil Nil Disallowance u/s 14A 37,19,337 37,19,337 37,19,337 Service Tax Receivable 1,64,16,000 1,64,16,000 Nil Short credit of TDS 15,65,426 Nil Nil Thus after the order of ITAT dt.10.04.2018 (PB 25-94), following disallowance made by the AO stood confirmed:- Disallowance of CSR Expenses

K.P. AIRTECH,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 42/JPR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Aug 2021AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Miss. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 253(5)Section 36(1)(va)

70).” 5. In ITA No. 42/JP/2021 for A.Y 2019-20, the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- “1. That the order passed by ld. CIT(A) is bad in law as he failed to appreciate that disallowance under section

K.P. AIRTECH,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 41/JPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Aug 2021AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Miss. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 253(5)Section 36(1)(va)

70).” 5. In ITA No. 42/JP/2021 for A.Y 2019-20, the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- “1. That the order passed by ld. CIT(A) is bad in law as he failed to appreciate that disallowance under section

M/S RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated\nhereinabove

ITA 309/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80

70,76,173 | Nil | Nil\n| Disallowance u/s 14A | 37,19,337 | 37,19,337 | 37,19,337\n| Service Tax Receivable | 1,64,16,000 | 1,64,16,000 | Nil\n| Short credit of TDS | 15,65,426 | Nil | Nil\n\nThus after the order of ITAT dt.10.04.2018 (PB 25-94), following disallowance\nmade by the AO stood confirmed

PREM DEVI BAID,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(5), JAIPUR, NCRB, STATUE CIRCLE, C-SCHEME

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 50/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

For Appellant: Mr. Dheeraj Borad, CA. Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 14ASection 250Section 57Section 68

Section 68 of the Act, along with the consequential disallowance of interest amounting to Rs. 22,70,120/- claimed under

SOHAN LAL TAMBI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD1(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 40/JPR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Aug 2021AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Mukesh khandelwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

disallowance made by ld. AO for Rs. 1,61,099/- being the amount collected from employees towards contribution to welfare funds but deposited later than the scheduled dates as per provisions of PF Act, but deposited prior to filing the return under section 139(1) of the income Tax Act, 1961 ignoring the binding judgment of the Honorable jurisdiction High

RASHLEELA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. THE PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 461/JPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Sept 2024AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153DSection 263

disallowance according to\nthe provisions of Rule 8D as applicable for the year under\nconsideration would be merely Rs. 2,118/- on account of indirect\nexpenses and nil on account of direct expenses as there were no\ndirectly attributable expenses.\nIn view of above, it is prayed that the order passed by ld.AO is neither\nerroneous nor prejudicial

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 so made by the Assessing officer. 11. The Co-ordinate Bench in case of ITO vs. Anthelio Business Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 78 taxmann.com 203 (Mumbai) in context of deduction under section 10B relying on the aforesaid CBDT Circular has taken a similar view and it would be relevant to refer to the findings of the Co-ordinate Bench which

TRUWORTH INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 79/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

disallowance deserves to be deleted. [Asstt. CIT v. Pardeep Kumar Aggarwal [2016] 70 taxmann.com 154/159 ITD 54 (Chd.)]. The Circular No. 5 of 2014 dated 11-02-2014 being inconsistent with 7 TRUWORTH INFOTECH PVT LTD. VS ITO , WARD 2(2), JAIPUR plethora of decisions of High Courts and ITATS cannot be applied by A.O. and is of no avail

PARIS ELYSEES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-7, JAIPUR

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

ITA 357/JPR/2022[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Jaipur20 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri James Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

section 36(1)(va). Thus, only factual reporting, which was mandated, was done and no opinion was expressed regarding the disallowance. Otherwise also no disallowance can be made on the basis of mere reporting in Audit Report. The disallowance can be made only on the basis of relevant law and taking into account judicial view in that regard. 2.2.iv

SH. AJAY SONI,27, MAHADEO DAGDI NAGAR, BEHIND ADARSH NAGAR, GALI NO.2, BEAWAR vs. CPC, BENGALURU , BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 177/JPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

70,964/- towards employee’s contribution towards ESI and PF. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A), NFAC has confirmed the disallowance made U/s 143(1) on account of assessee’s failure to pay the employee’s contribution of PF/ESI within the prescribed due dates as per Section

DEEPAK HASSANI,KISHANGARH vs. DCIT CIR-2, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 138/JPR/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Nov 2021AY 2019-2020

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri O.P. Bhatheja (ITP.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT) a
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

70,599/- towards employee’s contribution towards ESI and PF. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A), NFAC has confirmed the disallowance made U/s 143(1) on account of assessee’s failure to pay the employee’s contribution of PF/ESI within the prescribed due dates as per Section

OCEAN EXIM INDIA PRIVATE LTD,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 37/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Prabha Rana (Adv.)For Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(A)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

70 (Raj) iv. DCIT vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. the ITAT Jaipur Bench ‘B’ ITA No. 1287/JP/2019 Jan 18, 2021 (2021) 61CCH 0057 Jaipur Trib v. So your honour the impugned ESI/PF disallowance is requested to order to delete the addition. Kindly allow the assessee’s appeal” Per contra, the ld. Sr. DR supported the contentions raised

NIMBUS PIPES LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 384/JPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Badaya (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri R.S. Meel (JCIT)
Section 154Section 36(1)(va)

70,214 15-04-2018 87,470 15-04-2019 9 Fund ES! 11,402 3,817 15-05-2018

SH. NAWAL KISHORE DANGAYACH,A-34-A, RAM NAGAR, SHASTRI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 304/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary ( Addl. CIT) a
Section 14ASection 37

disallowed 7. The Ld. CIT(A) has relied on the decision of ITAT, Kolkata Bench and ITAT. Bangalore Bench. It is submitted that in both the decisions the effect of insertion of Explanation 3 to section 40(a)(ii) has not been considered. Further Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Harshad Shantilal Mehta Vs. Custodian (1998) 231 ITR 0871/99

PINK CITY JEWEL HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

ITA 598/JPR/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019
For Appellant: Sh. Siddharth Ranka, AdvFor Respondent: \nSh. Saurav Harsh, Adv.&
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144oSection 14ASection 263Section 69

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act can\nbe made if the assessee had not earned any exempt income? - HELD THAT:- A\nperusal of the Memorandum of the Finance Bill, 2022 reveals that it explicitly stipulates\nthat the amendment made to Section 14A will take effect from 1st April, 2022 and will\napply in relation to the assessment year