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.

76 results for “disallowance”+ Set Off of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai8,960Delhi6,096Chennai2,581Kolkata2,396Bangalore2,308Ahmedabad1,112Hyderabad747Pune737Jaipur694Surat402Indore330Raipur326Chandigarh321Karnataka277Rajkot260Visakhapatnam203Cochin200Lucknow176Nagpur165Amritsar142Cuttack135Agra96Ranchi82Guwahati80Telangana77Jodhpur76SC70Calcutta65Patna57Panaji55Allahabad39Dehradun38Jabalpur28Varanasi27Kerala22Orissa10Punjab & Haryana7Himachal Pradesh4Rajasthan4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1Andhra Pradesh1Tripura1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)102Section 26372Section 143(1)49Addition to Income47Disallowance45Section 153A26Deduction24Section 143(2)22Section 35A22Section 147

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR , JODHPUR vs. JODHPUR HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD., JODHPUR

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 541/JODH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Jun 2025AY 2016-17
Section 139Section 148Section 35ASection 801A(7)Section 80J

losses against other income was allowed as the other income was related to the specified business activity.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": ["35AD", "80-IA", "73A"], "issues": "Whether the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the additions related to disallowance of deduction u/s 35AD and disallowance of discount expenses. Whether set

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR , JODHPUR vs. JODHPUR HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD., JODHPUR

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

Showing 1–20 of 76 · Page 1 of 4

20
Section 14820
Revision u/s 26313
ITA 544/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Jun 2025AY 2017-18
Section 139Section 148Section 35ASection 801A(7)Section 80J

disallowance of discount expenses was not justified, considering the initial years of operation and the nature of the business. Furthermore, the Tribunal held that income from other sources related to the specified business could be set off against the business loss

MAHENDRA SINGH DHARAMPAL & CO.,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 229/JODH/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blemahendra Singh Dharampal & Acit Circle 2, Co Udaipur - 313001 15-18, Diamond Plazza, Hiran Magri Sect 5, Udaipur - 313001 Pan No. Aadfm 9764 A Assessee By Shri Yogesh Pokharna, C.A. (Physical) Revenue By Shri K.C. Meena, Addl. Cit-Dr (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 13.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 28.01.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal [Hereinafter Referred To As The Cit(A)] Udaipur Dated 19.03.2024 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Challenging Therein Confirmation Of Penalty Of Rs. 1,54,500/- Levied U/S 271(1)(C) By The Ao.

Section 113Section 139(4)Section 144Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40

disallowance of claim of Rs. 5,00,000/- as remuneration to partners on the basis of original return of income. However, on rectification of the mistake which was allowed by the Tribunal, the computation of income of the firm stands as under: Income from Business or Profession (Chapter IV D) (Maximum Salary Rs.-68,966 nil) Profit as per profit

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)

disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished

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)

disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished

DHABAN GRAM SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITY,SANGARIA vs. ITO WARD 1 , HANUMANGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 771/JODH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Ble

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(iv)

Disallowance of loss set-off against late return, etc. 3 M/s Dhaban Gram Sewa Sahakari Samity But the CPC adjusted

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JODHPUR , JODHPUR vs. JODHPUR HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD., JODHPUR

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 545/JODH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Ble

Section 139Section 148Section 35ASection 801A(7)Section 80J

disallowance of discounts by holding that AO no-where in the order has brought on record that the claim made by the appellant was by way of fraud, by ignoring that the onus to prove the genuineness of the expenses is on the assessee who has claimed them. 7. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in allowing set

NAVAL KISHORE DAGA,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 83/JODH/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur03 Oct 2023AY 2017-18
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 57

disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished

KAUSHALIYA DEVI DHOOT,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 779/JODH/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur30 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon'Ble & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

Section 11Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 801A

set off benefit of brought forward loss particularly the same has been accepted as genuine in the assessment order passed by the Ld AO. 6. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld CIT(A) grossly erred in upholding the rejection of TDS credit of Rs. 46664/- claimed by the assessee and also allowable

CHHITAR MAL JAIN ,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 113/JODH/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur22 Nov 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 70

disallowance of set off of Short Term Capital Loss by Short and Long Term Capital Gains as provided in section

M/S. KHADI GRAMMODHYOG PRATISTHAN,BIKANER vs. ADIT, CPC / ITO, WARD-1(2), BANGALURU / BIKANER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 87/JODH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur31 Aug 2023AY 2019-20
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 250(6)

disallowing a sum of Rs. 3,51,811/- on account of current year’s losses. After looking into the entire factual matrix of the case, I find that assessee’s plea is untenable because losses can only be allowed when the return of income is filed within the stipulated time prescribed by the Act. It is noted from the order

SRM SPINNERS LIMITED,BHILWARA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 90/JODH/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur18 Aug 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripotesrm Spinners Ltd., Vs. Cit(A) / Nfac Sukh Shanti, Sukh Delhi-110002. Shanti, Sabun Marg, Bhilwara – 311001, Rajasthan, Pan/Gir No. : Aascs1833L Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Prerana Choudhary, Jcit – Dr Date Of Hearing 18.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/S 154 & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Prerana choudhary
Section 139(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

disallowances 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in manufacturing of yarn and has filed the return of income for the A.Y 2020-21 disclosing a total income of Rs. Nil after setting off of Losses

SHRI MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL, HUF,PALI. vs. ITO, WARD-2, PALI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 213/JODH/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteshri Mahendra Kumar Vs. Ito – Ward-2 Goyal Huf, Pali, Marwar, M/S Merita &Co,Ca Pali-306401, 244,Kamalanehru Rajasthan Nagar,Opp;Prakartic Chikitsa Kendra, Chopasni Road, Jodhpur-348008, Rajasthan Pan/Gir No. : Aaehm7139L Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri N. R Mertia, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Nidhi Nair, Jcit -Dr Date Of Hearing 14.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)(Cit(A)-I, Jodhpur Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Fallowing Grounds Of Appeal As Under: Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal Huf, Pali. 1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals-1), Jodhpur Has Erred In Law & Facts In Maintaining The Disallowance Of Interest Made By Ld. A.O Of Rs. 4,61,473/- (3,11,690/- + 1,49,783/-) By Invoking Sec. 36(1)(Iii) Of The Act Which The Ld. Cit(A) Erroneously & Unjustifiedly Held As Right Actions On The Part Of The Id. A.O. The Actions Being Erroneous & Unjustified May Kindly Be Cancelled. The Hon'Ble Itat May Kindly Allow The Appeal By Allowing The Claimed Interest As Revenue Expenditure.

For Appellant: Shri N. R Mertia, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Nair, JCIT -DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

loss account. The contentions raised by the Ld. AR that the assessee has utilized funds from the internal accruals for the purpose of business and the assessee has own/ surplus funds more than the borrowed funds and substantial material was filed before the revenue authorities and demonstrated the submissions made before the appellate authorities

TARUN MURADIA,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 848/JODH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur23 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Section 132aSection 132tSection 143(2)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

loss, claim for disallowance of interest of substantial amount, additions made on account of unexplained cash entries in the bankaccounts, etc.the ITAT noticed inter alia that all the additions werenot based upon anyfresh materials seized during the course of search. That was the first groundfor setting

BHOOP SINGH POONIA,NOHAR vs. ITO WARD, NOHAR, NOHAR

ITA 405/JODH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Jun 2025AY 2014-15
Section 133A

disallowed this claim for want of verification. A perusal\nof the record would indicate that inspite of survey carried out at\nthe premises of the assessee, the ld. AO was unable to pin-point\nas to why direct and indirect expenses are not required for\nearning a huge income of more than Rs.72 lacs which has been\noffered

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

losses. Accordingly, it was submitted that there was no reason to disallow Sambhav Energy Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-01, Jodhpur depreciation claimed by the assessee. The assessee has also placed its reliance on various case laws. 14. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court has held as under in the case of CIT vs. Swarup Vegetable Products India

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

losses. Accordingly, it was submitted that there was no reason to disallow Sambhav Energy Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-01, Jodhpur depreciation claimed by the assessee. The assessee has also placed its reliance on various case laws. 14. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court has held as under in the case of CIT vs. Swarup Vegetable Products India

UTTARAKHAND VIKAS SAMITI,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CPC / ITO, WARD EXEMPTION, UDAIPUR

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

ITA 257/JODH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Bleuttarakhand Vikas Samiti Vs. Dcit, Cpc/Ito, Ward Exemption, 117, Main Road, Bhupalpura, Udaipur - 313001 Udaipur - 313001 Pan No. Aaatu 3935 G Assessee By Shri Yogesh Pokharna, C.A. (Physical) Shri K.C. Meena, Addl. Cit-Dr (Virtual) Revenue By Date Of Hearing 13.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 28.01.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: The Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/Jcit (A) Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Jcit Appeal”] Dated 24.01.2025 With Respect To Assessment Year 2018-19 Challenging Therein Confirmation Of Addition Of Rs. 6,00,000/- Without Appreciating Facts Of The Case.

Section 10BSection 11Section 119(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 8

loss) after making adjustments for any incorrect claim in the return. Asst. Year: 2017-18 2 The incorrect claim had further been explained as a claim, on the basis of an entry, in the return of an item, which is consistent with another entry of the same or some other item in such return. Now if a claim of set

BIKANER CERAMICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BIKANER vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, BIKANER

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 36/JODH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripotebikaner Ceramics Pvt Vs. Acit, Circle – 1 Ltd.,Industrial Area, Bikaner, Bikaner-334001, Rajasthan. Rajasthan. Rpan/Gir No. : Aaacb6690C Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri Amit Kotharia, Ca.Ar Revenue By : Ms. Prerana Choudhary, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing 16.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/S 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kotharia, CA.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Prerana Choudhary
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Loss account which is at higher side. We find the A.O has not disputed the Bikaner Ceramics Pvt Ltd, Binaner. genuineness of the expenditure claimed and the utilization of expenses is wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business but due to non production of complete bills and vouchers has estimated the disallowance 20%.We considering the overall facts, turnover

OCHHAB LAL JAIN,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDIAPUR, UDAIPUR

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

ITA 428/JODH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 May 2025AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69A

loss. The Appellate Assistant\nCommissioner accepted this contention, but set aside the assessment and remanded the\ncase to the Income-tax Officer for reassessment with a view to assessing the sum of Rs. 4\nlakhs. In dealing with the case, the High Court held that the powers of remand were\nextremely wide, but it quoted with approval the decision