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.

68 results for “disallowance”+ Section 32clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai6,721 Delhi6,170 Bangalore2,049 Chennai1,921 Kolkata1,569 Ahmedabad1,488 Pune1,052 Hyderabad1,029 Jaipur840 Indore530 Chandigarh495 Surat367 Visakhapatnam317 Raipur309 Cochin290 Rajkot261 Karnataka244 Amritsar230 Cuttack216 Nagpur180 Lucknow123 Guwahati107 Agra105 Panaji86 Ranchi81 Allahabad79 Jodhpur68 SC64 Telangana60 Calcutta54 Patna52 Dehradun43 Kerala28 Varanasi25 Jabalpur20 Orissa6 Punjab & Haryana6 Rajasthan3 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2 Himachal Pradesh1 J&K1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Tripura1 Uttarakhand1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1

Key Topics

Section 26379 Section 143(3)56 Disallowance47 Addition to Income45 Section 80I36 Section 14832 Section 143(1)25 Deduction20 Section 80P(2)(d)16 Section 80P

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JODHPUR, JODHPUR vs. SUNCITY METALS AND TUBES PVT. LTD., JODHPUR

In the result, the revenue appeal is dismissed

ITA 267/JODH/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, HonʼBle & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Hon'Ble

Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 43(1)Section 55(2)(a)

disallowed depreciation under section 32(1) (ii) of the Income Tax Act. Being aggrieved with the assessment order, assessee went

M/S. DEEPAK & COMPANY INFRA PVT. LTD. ,SRI GANGANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, SRIGANAGNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 36/JODH/2021[2015-16]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 68 · Page 1 of 4

16

ITAT Jodhpur

07 Sept 2021

AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Jain (Adv.) &For Respondent: Smt. Sanchita Kumar (CIT)

Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)Section 80I

disallowed by the Assessing Officer on the grounds that such infrastructural facility is not owned, wholly or partly, by the taxpayer which is an essential condition for claiming depreciation and further right to collect toll does not fall in any of the categories of 'intangible assets' specified in sub-clause(ii) of sub-section (1) of section 32

NAHAR COLOURS AND COATINHGS PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OFINCOMETAX, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/JODH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 801ASection 80I

disallowance of expenditure under Section14AtobeRs. 183.63/acs. 1. It is accepted and admitted that the Assessing Officer had not applied Section 14A and no deduction under the said Section was made. In respect of the present assessment year, i.e., Assessment Year 2000-01, the contention of the respondent- assessee is that in view of the proviso to Section

M/S. TIRUPATI MICROTECH PVT. LTD.,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, UDAIPUR

ITA 264/JODH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumarassessment Years: 2010-11 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aaact5483D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aanpn5358H Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aaact5483D Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Lodha, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Vohra, CIT-DR

disallowance of additional depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. While deciding Revenue’s appeal in ITA No. 593/Jodh/2014

M/S. TIRUPATI MICROTECH PVT. LTD.,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, UDAIPUR

ITA 23/JODH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumarassessment Years: 2010-11 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aaact5483D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aanpn5358H Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aaact5483D Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Lodha, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Vohra, CIT-DR

disallowance of additional depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. While deciding Revenue’s appeal in ITA No. 593/Jodh/2014

ACIT, UDAIPUR vs. M/S. TIRUPATI MICROTECH P.LTD., UDAIPUR

ITA 16/JODH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumarassessment Years: 2010-11 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aaact5483D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aanpn5358H Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aaact5483D Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Lodha, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Vohra, CIT-DR

disallowance of additional depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. While deciding Revenue’s appeal in ITA No. 593/Jodh/2014

ACIT, UDAIPUR vs. M/S. TIRUPATI MICROTECH P.LTD., UDAIPUR

ITA 593/JODH/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumarassessment Years: 2010-11 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aaact5483D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aanpn5358H Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aaact5483D Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Lodha, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Vohra, CIT-DR

disallowance of additional depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. While deciding Revenue’s appeal in ITA No. 593/Jodh/2014

ACIT, UDAIPUR vs. M/S. TIRUPATI MICROTECH P. LTD., UDAIPUR

ITA 252/JODH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumarassessment Years: 2010-11 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aaact5483D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aanpn5358H Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Circle-2, Versus M/S. Tirupati Microtech P. Ltd. Udaipur. 1604/1610, Village Thoor, Udaipur. Pan: Aaact5483D Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Lodha, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Vohra, CIT-DR

disallowance of additional depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. While deciding Revenue’s appeal in ITA No. 593/Jodh/2014

HARMONY PLASTICS PVT.LTD., ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 180/JODH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad180/Jodh/2019 (Assessment Year- 2015-16) M/S. Harmony Plastics Pvt Ltd. V The Acit S F-335-339, Bhamashah Industrial Circle-1 Area, Kaladwas, Udaipur Uddaipur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabch 5399 D

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32(2)(iia)

disallowance of allowance of balance 50% additional depreciation on new plant & Machinery purchased and put to use during the IInd Half of A.Y. 2014-15 on the alleged ground that in terms of clause (iia) of Section 32

ACIT, PAOTA C ROAD vs. VARAHA INFRA LIMITED, PAOTA B ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 160/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaithe Acit Vs M/S. Vardha Infra Ltd. Room No. 215, Aayakar Bhawan 6 Jalam Vilas Scheme Paota C Road, Jodhpur Paota B Road, Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccv 7972 K

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

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act though the appellant had disallowed amount of Rs. 37,56,32,712/- in computation

M/S TARUN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,WARD NO.24, NEAR BHAGAT SINGH CHOWK, SURATGARH vs. CPC, BANGALORE/ ITO, WARD-1, SRIGANGANAGAR, SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 109/JODH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR

Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

disallowances made are beyond the scope and ambit of adjustment provided under section 143(1)(a) while processing the returns of income. • At the time of filing of returns of income by the assessee for the respective assessment years, the law prevailing on the said date allowed the assessee to claim deduction of employees’ contribution

M/S TARUN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,WARD NO.24, NEAR BHAGAT SINGH CHOWK, SURATGARH vs. CPC, BANGALORE/ ITO, WARD-1, SRIGANGANAGAR , SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 108/JODH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR

Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

disallowances made are beyond the scope and ambit of adjustment provided under section 143(1)(a) while processing the returns of income. • At the time of filing of returns of income by the assessee for the respective assessment years, the law prevailing on the said date allowed the assessee to claim deduction of employees’ contribution

U AND T TRACTOR SPARES PRIVATE LIMITED,JODHPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 43/JODH/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Aug 2021AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Raksha Birla (C.A.) & Shri Mohit Soni (C.A.)For Respondent: Miss Kajal Singh (JCIT)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

32 (Raj), the Hon'ble High Court has once again held that the employees' contributions to the PF, ESI, etc. made within the due date of filing the return u/s 139(1) shall be allowable as deduction. It was submitted that against the aforesaid decision of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court, the SLP filed by the department before

SAMBHAV ENERGY LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 257/JODH/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 32 of the Act. 8. In view of the foregoing discussions, we find that the view taken by the Tribunal is legally justified.” Identical view has been expressed by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd vs. CIT (2013)(357 ITR 253)(Delhi). 15. In the instant case, though the tax authorities

SAMBHAV ENERGY LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 258/JODH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 32 of the Act. 8. In view of the foregoing discussions, we find that the view taken by the Tribunal is legally justified.” Identical view has been expressed by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd vs. CIT (2013)(357 ITR 253)(Delhi). 15. In the instant case, though the tax authorities

APNA GHAR ASHRAM,JODHPUR vs. DDIT, CPC / ITO, WARD (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE / JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 730/JODH/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT(Sr. D.R)

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

disallowance was purely technical in nature and not on the merits of the exemption claim. He pointed out that Form 10B had been uploaded by the auditor within time and that the delay was only in verification, which was cured before the return was processed. It was contended that the audit report was very much available on record before

M/S. SHREE TIRUPATI ASSOCIATES,BHILWARA vs. ITO, BHILWARA

ITA 2/JODH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 30Section 40ASection 40A(3)

section 40A (3) applies to the payment of Rs. 650000/- paid by assessee to the seller and question of law arose and same should be allowed by your good self by setting aside the order of A.O. by judging the case from view of the businessmen and not of revenue as a businessmen have to made payment otherwise than

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR vs. VIKRAM ANJANA, CHITTORGARH

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 274/JODH/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosaindy. Commissioner Of Vs Sh. Vikram Anjana Income-Tax, Kesunda, Chhoti Central Circle-01, Udaipur Sadri, Chittorgarh (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afkpa 0575 R

Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. 4. Facts of this issue have been narrated in detail in the above para. Before us both the parties, have reiterated their earlier arguments. We have found that the revenue cannot insist upon the assessee to borrow funds from particular/parties and at a fixed rate of interest. The assessee has to consider various

AJMER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AJMER vs. CIT(EXEMPTION)/ ITO (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR / JODHPUR

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 89/JODH/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

disallowing the amount of Rs. 68,62,780, i.e. the income which has escaped assessment as per the reasons recorded. Neither the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment nor any other material on record demonstrate that the issue relating to the claim of deduction under s.801A of the Act was ever a subject matter of dispute in the re-assessment

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDIPUR vs. M/S. WAGAD CONSTRUTION COMPANY, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 30/JODH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Venkatesh V. (JCIT-Sr.DR)

disallowing additional depreciation of Rs. 5177474 claimed on new plant & machineries relating to manufacture of Ready Mix Concrete (RMC). 26.2 The appellant company claim of additional depreciation on Plant & Machinery relating to Manufacturing of Ready Mixed Concrete under section 32