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.

4 results for “disallowance”+ Section 36(1)(via)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai620Delhi533Chennai236Bangalore234Kolkata127Ahmedabad113Jaipur112Hyderabad82Chandigarh71Pune69Surat42Panaji35Indore30Cuttack27Cochin25Guwahati25Nagpur20Rajkot18Telangana16Amritsar15Jodhpur12Lucknow7Dehradun5SC5Visakhapatnam4Karnataka4Raipur4Calcutta3Varanasi3Allahabad2Ranchi1Rajasthan1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 80H10Section 36(1)(viia)9Section 2605Section 36(1)(vii)5Section 260A4Section 364Deduction4Addition to Income3Section 41(1)2

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. M/S SYNDICATE BANK

The appeals are disposed of

ITA/256/2011HC Karnataka24 Jan 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260Section 260ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowing an amount of Rs.192,53,21,426/- on reversal of interest pertaining to earlier years as deduction out of current years income and added back to interest on zero coupon bonds to the tune of RS.1,03,53,095/- along with other additions/disallowance in computation of regular income/book profit. It was held that as per section 36(1)(viia

SYNDICATE BANK vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed in

ITA/783/2018
HC Karnataka
18 Jun 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ

Section 115JSection 260Section 260ASection 36Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowance to the extent of Rs.92,14,87,404/- under Section 36 (1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; ii) The learned CIT (A) erred in holding that the deduction should be restricted to the provision made in the books of accounts; iii) Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT (A) erred in holding that the provision made

M/S J K INDUSTRIES LTD vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, all questions are answered against the

ITA/1360/2006HC Karnataka26 Feb 2013

Bench: D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260ASection 28Section 80H

disallowed as notional and not real, for the purpose of computation under Section 80HHC of the Act, the tribunal not having taken a contrary view, it is to be deemed as rejected. 17. Be that as it may, what we find is that in respect of the first item of incentive viz., premium sale exim scrips amount as claimed

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.PRAGATHI GRAMINA BANK

In the result, appeal stands rejected

ITA/100028/2014HC Karnataka09 Feb 2018

Bench: JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA,S.SUJATHA

Section 143(3)Section 260Section 36(1)(viia)Section 41(1)

disallowing the deduction of excess provision of bad and doubtful debts was challenged before the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) (for short, ‘CIT(A)’) and the same came to be allowed. Being aggrieved by the same, the Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal. Hence, this appeal by the Revenue. 3. Learned counsel Sri.Y.V. Raviraj