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.

3 results for “disallowance”+ Section 144C(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,418Delhi1,076Bangalore551Chennai178Kolkata161Hyderabad149Ahmedabad81Pune68Jaipur21Chandigarh18Karnataka17Dehradun15Visakhapatnam14Indore12Surat10Rajkot8Cochin6Kerala3Amritsar3Lucknow2Guwahati2Nagpur2Raipur2Panaji2Jodhpur1SC1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)5Section 36(1)(iii)4Section 92C3Disallowance3Section 144C2Transfer Pricing2Addition to Income2Deduction2

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. APOLLO TYRES LTD

Appeal is allowed in part as indicated

ITA/44/2017HC Kerala22 Sept 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM

For Appellant: M/S. APOLLO TYRES LTDFor Respondent: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 35Section 43ASection 92C

144C dt. 18/02/2015 was directed to be deleted : 4,70,07,847 3 Disallowance of claim of additional weighted deduction u/s.35(2AB) restricted to : 94,98,220 4 Disallowance of claim of loss on sale of investment in shares as deduction : 4,07,24,151 5 Disallowance of claim of unrealized foreign exchange fluctuation gain for adjustment against cost

M/S. JOYALUKKAS INDIA LTD, vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

In the result, the appeal fails and the substantial questions

ITA/10/2019HC Kerala21 Dec 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

For Appellant: M/S.JOYALUKKAS INDIA LTDFor Respondent: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

144C (13), an appeal was filed before the Tribunal. The issue that came up for consideration before the Tribunal was regarding the disallowance of an amount of Rs.92,28,405/- under proviso to Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The second appeal raises the said question. 4. The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration

M/S. APPOLLO TYRES LTD vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/249/2015HC Kerala26 Aug 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM

Section 40

5. Substantial question no.(c) reads thus: “c) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in confirming the disallowance of the amount of Rs. 1,03,92,000/- being year-end provision for payment of commission as an unascertained liability? 5.1 The assessee for the Assessment Year 2009-10 booked an expenditure