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.

20 results for “disallowance”+ Section 234B(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,694Delhi1,594Bangalore1,053Ahmedabad228Kolkata212Chennai181Jaipur143Hyderabad111Pune77Indore60Nagpur55Chandigarh38Allahabad38Surat36Lucknow33Rajkot28Agra23Karnataka20Dehradun17Ranchi16Raipur15Jodhpur12Patna11Amritsar9Visakhapatnam8Cochin7Cuttack6SC5Jabalpur4Panaji3Guwahati2Telangana1Varanasi1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 26055Section 14817Section 409Section 260A5Section 234B5Section 115J5Section 139(1)5Section 1535Disallowance5Revision u/s 263

M/S T T K PRESTIGE LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/30388/2015HC Karnataka10 Aug 2018

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice S.Sujatha

Section 143Section 147Section 148

3) dated 28.04.2011 by determining the income at Rs.255990979/- later it was rectified u/s 154 and the income assessed at Rs.271568373/- by disallowing the depreciation loss. - 57 - Audit scrutiny of assessment records revealed that the assessee had claimed an expenditure of Rs.14783.96 lakh under the head expenses as per Schedule 17 to accounts. However, on perusal of records

M/S GAONKAR MINES vs. THE ADDL COMMISSIONER

WP/36428/2016HC Karnataka14 Nov 2017

Bench: The Hon'Ble Dr.Justice Vineet Kothari

Section 119
5
Addition to Income4
Deduction4
Section 132
Section 234A
Section 234B
Section 234C
Section 40

234B or, as the case may be, section 234C can be considered, are as follows: (a) Where during the course of proceedings for search and seizure under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, or otherwise, the books of account and other incriminating documents have been seized, and the assessee has been unable to furnish the return of income

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S IBM INDIA LTD

The Appeal is partly allowed

ITA/130/2007HC Karnataka10 Apr 2013

Bench: B.MANOHAR,N.KUMAR

Section 115JSection 234Section 234BSection 260Section 4

234B of the Act is liable when income is computed under Section 115JA of the Act while omitting to taking into 6 consideration saving Clause Sub Section 4 to Section 115JA of the Act? 4. The assessee claim a sum of Rs.4,92,69,808/- being a provision made for warranty liability in respect of products sold and contended that

M/S GRANITE MART LIMITED vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER

In the result the order passed by the

ITA/28/2011HC Karnataka19 Mar 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

Section 260Section 260A

234B and 234C of the Act on the facts and circumstance of the case? 2. Since, in all the appeals common questions of law arise for consideration, they were heard analogously and are being decided by this common judgment. 7 I.T.A.NO.28/2011 3. The appellant filed its return of income for the assessment year 2005-06 and declared total income

CHITTHARANJAN A DASANNACHARYA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA/153/2014HC Karnataka23 Oct 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 2(47)Section 260Section 260ASection 54F

3) of the Act and artificially split the transaction into two and brought to tax the difference between the market value of shares on the date of exercise and the exercise price as 'income from salary' and the difference between the sale price of shares and market value of shares on the date of exercise of 'income from short term

M/S MAYA VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4(1)(2),

The appeal is allowed

ITA/136/2018HC Karnataka18 Feb 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 260

disallowing payment of Rs.65 Lakhs paid to the landlord towards the land expenses. 2.2. The facts further reveal that the appellant- Company has entered into a Joint Development Agreement dated 10.06.2004 with one Mr. D. Ramesh, the landlord for development of residential apartments measuring 2 acres and 7 guntas in Sy. No.70 of Jaraganahalli, Bangalore. The property in question

M/S A Y GARMENTS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA/422/2012HC Karnataka29 Jun 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 254(2)Section 260Section 260ASection 40Section 6

234B and 234C of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case? 2. Facts leading to filing of the appeal briefly stated are that the assessee is a private limited company carrying on the business of manufacture and export of ready made garments. The assessee for the Assessment year 2005-06 filed the return of income

M/S WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/881/2008HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

disallowed on the ground that the DTAA with USA and Canada shows that the claim is admissible only for the taxes paid under Income Tax Act in India and Federal tax in USA and Canada. In coming to the said conclusion the authorities have failed to notice Section 91 of the Act. Statutorily the assessee would be entitled to deduction

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/211/2009HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

disallowed on the ground that the DTAA with USA and Canada shows that the claim is admissible only for the taxes paid under Income Tax Act in India and Federal tax in USA and Canada. In coming to the said conclusion the authorities have failed to notice Section 91 of the Act. Statutorily the assessee would be entitled to deduction

M/S TRIMM EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the order dated 08

ITA/43/2017HC Karnataka13 Jul 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 260Section 48

3 deductable under Section 48 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and consequently passed a perverse order on the facts and circumstances of the case? b) Whether the Tribunal erred in law in holding the transaction was not genuine without appreciating the material on record which clearly indicates that the appellant had paid compensation for surrender of land

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S BHARAT INFRA TECH (P) LTD.,

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/450/2018HC Karnataka09 Sept 2022

Bench: N S SANJAY GOWDA,S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

Section 234ASection 260ASection 40A

SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO: (I) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE; (II) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN I.T.A. NO.1442/BANG/2014 DATED 19.01.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-C CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

M/S BRIGADE PLAZA UNIT OWNERS ASSOCIATION vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA/464/2019HC Karnataka25 Feb 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 143(2)Section 260

disallowance claimed by the assessee to the tune of Rs.22,14,270/- under exempt income 4 category and assessed tax under Sections 234A and 234B of the Act, 1961. 6. The assessee, being aggrieved by the order passed by the assessing officer, dated 18.12.2017, preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals). However, the Commissioner of Income

M/S NITESH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

In the result, the following:

ITA/210/2017HC Karnataka02 Aug 2022

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,M G UMA

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 260

234B and 234C of the Act, 1961 on the facts and circumstance of the case. I.T.A No.210/2017 3 2. Heard Shri. A. Shankar, learned Senior Advocate for appellant and Shri. K.V. Aravind, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue. 3. Brief facts of the case are, assessee is a Private Limited Company in the business of development of Real estate

XIAOMI TECHNOLOGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I pass the following:

WP/16692/2022HC Karnataka16 Dec 2022

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

Section 281BSection 281ESection 92C

disallowed. On 10.08.2022, petitioner submitted a detailed response along with documents and contested the said Notice and proceedings. - 6 - 2.3 On 11.08.2022, upon obtaining approval from the 3rd respondent, the 1st respondent passed the impugned order under Section 281B of the I.T.Act provisionally attaching the subject fixed deposits of the petitioner in a sum of INR 3,700 crores

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.PARVATHI MADHAVA

The appeals are allowed

ITA/5037/2009HC Karnataka13 Aug 2012

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 153Section 260

3 above. (ix) The copy of challan dated 26.09.1997 for payment of taxes under VDIS scheme is enclosed for your verification (Annexure IV). (x) The amount of `6,63,20,630/- under VDIS scheme has been paid out of the sale proceeds through my bank account with IDBI bank. (xi) The copies of declaration and challan for payment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA, M/S BELLARY STEEL ROLING MILLS,

The appeals are allowed

ITA/5035/2009HC Karnataka13 Aug 2012

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 153Section 260

3 above. (ix) The copy of challan dated 26.09.1997 for payment of taxes under VDIS scheme is enclosed for your verification (Annexure IV). (x) The amount of `6,63,20,630/- under VDIS scheme has been paid out of the sale proceeds through my bank account with IDBI bank. (xi) The copies of declaration and challan for payment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA (HUF)

The appeals are allowed

ITA/5038/2009HC Karnataka13 Aug 2012

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 153Section 260

3 above. (ix) The copy of challan dated 26.09.1997 for payment of taxes under VDIS scheme is enclosed for your verification (Annexure IV). (x) The amount of `6,63,20,630/- under VDIS scheme has been paid out of the sale proceeds through my bank account with IDBI bank. (xi) The copies of declaration and challan for payment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA (HUF)

The appeals are allowed

ITA/5036/2009HC Karnataka13 Aug 2012

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 153Section 260

3 above. (ix) The copy of challan dated 26.09.1997 for payment of taxes under VDIS scheme is enclosed for your verification (Annexure IV). (x) The amount of `6,63,20,630/- under VDIS scheme has been paid out of the sale proceeds through my bank account with IDBI bank. (xi) The copies of declaration and challan for payment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA, M/S BELLARY STEEL ROLING MILLS,

The appeals are allowed

ITA/5034/2009HC Karnataka13 Aug 2012

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 153Section 260

3 above. (ix) The copy of challan dated 26.09.1997 for payment of taxes under VDIS scheme is enclosed for your verification (Annexure IV). (x) The amount of `6,63,20,630/- under VDIS scheme has been paid out of the sale proceeds through my bank account with IDBI bank. (xi) The copies of declaration and challan for payment

SMT DEEPA S PAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

In the result, the order passed by the Assessing Officer as well

ITA/69/2015HC Karnataka20 Jan 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260Section 45(2)

3. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that the assessee filed return of income for assessment year 2004-05 on 31.10.2004 declaring NIL income. The assessee was holding certain shares as investments while she was a minor. On attaining majority, the assessee converted the shares 4 into stock-in-trade and valued them