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.

31 results for “disallowance”+ Search & Seizureclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,585Delhi2,364Chennai580Bangalore568Hyderabad481Kolkata320Jaipur305Surat170Chandigarh115Pune115Indore104Ahmedabad103Cochin91Rajkot83Nagpur66Amritsar65Visakhapatnam60Allahabad50Guwahati44Lucknow43Raipur37Karnataka31Patna27Jodhpur26Telangana25Ranchi23Cuttack18Agra16Dehradun13Kerala10Panaji6SC6Calcutta5Gauhati2Punjab & Haryana2Varanasi2Orissa2Rajasthan1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 260109Section 14811Section 1327Section 139(1)6Section 260A5Section 1535Section 153A5Revision u/s 2635Section 153C4Addition to Income

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. GALI JANARDHANA REDDY

ITA/704/2018HC Karnataka31 Mar 2023

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 153CSection 153DSection 260A

search and seizure action under Section 132 of the IT Act carried out in the case of Sri Madhu, Smt.Renuka, Sri Raghavacharyulu and others on 25.10.2010. 12. These are all the provision that has been appraised by the learned standing counsel Sri K.V.Arvind for the Revenue/appellant. It is stated that the proceedings initiated under Section 153C are therefore in order

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. G. LAKSHMI ARUNA

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2

3
Disallowance3
Search & Seizure3
ITA/705/2018HC Karnataka31 Mar 2023

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153CSection 153DSection 260A

seizure action under Section 132 of the IT Act carried out in the case of Sri Madhu, Smt.Renuka, Sri Raghavacharyulu and others on 25.10.2010. During the course of search proceedings, various documents belonging to the appellant were assessed as detailed in the assessment orders. These are all the provisions that has been appraised by the learned standing counsel Sri K.V.Arvind

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HASSAN HAJEE & CO

Appeals are allowed in part

ITA/472/2018HC Karnataka02 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

search and seizure and the statements of the relevant persons recorded, disallowed the expenditure claimed. While determining the quantum of speed

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S HASSAN HAJEE & CO.

Appeals are allowed in part

ITA/818/2017HC Karnataka02 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

search and seizure and the statements of the relevant persons recorded, disallowed the expenditure claimed. While determining the quantum of speed

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S HASSAN HAJEE & CO.

Appeals are allowed in part

ITA/821/2017HC Karnataka02 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

search and seizure and the statements of the relevant persons recorded, disallowed the expenditure claimed. While determining the quantum of speed

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S HASSAN HAJEE & CO.

Appeals are allowed in part

ITA/816/2017HC Karnataka02 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

search and seizure and the statements of the relevant persons recorded, disallowed the expenditure claimed. While determining the quantum of speed

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HASSAN HAJEE & CO

Appeals are allowed in part

ITA/473/2018HC Karnataka02 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

search and seizure and the statements of the relevant persons recorded, disallowed the expenditure claimed. While determining the quantum of speed

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HASSAN HAJEE & CO

Appeals are allowed in part

ITA/470/2018HC Karnataka02 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

search and seizure and the statements of the relevant persons recorded, disallowed the expenditure claimed. While determining the quantum of speed

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HASSAN HAJEE & CO

Appeals are allowed in part

ITA/471/2018HC Karnataka02 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

search and seizure and the statements of the relevant persons recorded, disallowed the expenditure claimed. While determining the quantum of speed

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HASSAN HAJEE & CO

Appeals are allowed in part

ITA/468/2018HC Karnataka02 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

search and seizure and the statements of the relevant persons recorded, disallowed the expenditure claimed. While determining the quantum of speed

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S HASSAN HAJEE & CO.

Appeals are allowed in part

ITA/817/2017HC Karnataka02 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

search and seizure and the statements of the relevant persons recorded, disallowed the expenditure claimed. While determining the quantum of speed

THE PR. COMMISIONER INCOME TAX vs. M/S. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/197/2021HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

disallowance made under Section 40[a][ia] for non deduction of TDS on payments made to Director’s towards sitting fees by holding that - 16 - the amendment will apply for A.Y.2014-15 onwards?” In ITA No.381/2018: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that incriminating

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/381/2018HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

disallowance made under Section 40[a][ia] for non deduction of TDS on payments made to Director’s towards sitting fees by holding that - 16 - the amendment will apply for A.Y.2014-15 onwards?” In ITA No.381/2018: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that incriminating

THE PR. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/198/2021HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

disallowance made under Section 40[a][ia] for non deduction of TDS on payments made to Director’s towards sitting fees by holding that - 16 - the amendment will apply for A.Y.2014-15 onwards?” In ITA No.381/2018: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that incriminating

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/385/2018HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

disallowance made under Section 40[a][ia] for non deduction of TDS on payments made to Director’s towards sitting fees by holding that - 16 - the amendment will apply for A.Y.2014-15 onwards?” In ITA No.381/2018: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that incriminating

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/380/2018HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

disallowance made under Section 40[a][ia] for non deduction of TDS on payments made to Director’s towards sitting fees by holding that - 16 - the amendment will apply for A.Y.2014-15 onwards?” In ITA No.381/2018: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that incriminating

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/382/2018HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

disallowance made under Section 40[a][ia] for non deduction of TDS on payments made to Director’s towards sitting fees by holding that - 16 - the amendment will apply for A.Y.2014-15 onwards?” In ITA No.381/2018: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that incriminating

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD.,

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/324/2018HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

disallowance made under Section 40[a][ia] for non deduction of TDS on payments made to Director’s towards sitting fees by holding that - 16 - the amendment will apply for A.Y.2014-15 onwards?” In ITA No.381/2018: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that incriminating

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/384/2018HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

disallowance made under Section 40[a][ia] for non deduction of TDS on payments made to Director’s towards sitting fees by holding that - 16 - the amendment will apply for A.Y.2014-15 onwards?” In ITA No.381/2018: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that incriminating

THE PR. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/199/2021HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

disallowance made under Section 40[a][ia] for non deduction of TDS on payments made to Director’s towards sitting fees by holding that - 16 - the amendment will apply for A.Y.2014-15 onwards?” In ITA No.381/2018: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that incriminating