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.

244 results for “disallowance”+ Section 10(46)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,957Delhi1,827Chennai503Bangalore413Ahmedabad370Hyderabad363Jaipur357Kolkata244Raipur201Chandigarh200Indore168Pune138Surat133Amritsar111Rajkot108Cochin101Visakhapatnam82Nagpur79Lucknow60Panaji54Allahabad44SC40Guwahati40Cuttack37Ranchi35Agra32Jodhpur31Dehradun16Jabalpur11Patna9Varanasi7RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)78Addition to Income73Section 14A63Section 25062Section 4052Disallowance51Section 115J45Section 14737Section 14834Deduction

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

ITA 2037/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2015-16
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

10 consecutive years from the year in\nwhich such business will be operational or ready for operation. Therefore,\nthe disallowance proposed here to the extent of Rs.77,70,880/- and added\nback to the returned income of the assessee.”\n6.2 The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the facts of the case and\nsubmissions of the assessee gave his findings

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1247/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Showing 1–20 of 244 · Page 1 of 13

...
32
Section 143(1)29
Condonation of Delay24
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

10 consecutive years from the year in\nwhich such business will be operational or ready for operation. Therefore,\nthe disallowance proposed here to the extent of Rs.77,70,880/- and added\nback to the returned income of the assessee.”\n6.2 The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the facts of the case and\nsubmissions of the assessee gave his findings

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

ITA 623/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 250

section 10 applies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance of expenditure debited in the profit and loss account as prepared under the Companies Act as neither any direct expenses nor any interest has been disallowed under Rule 8D of the IT Rules and the disallowance has been made only under clause (iii) of Rule

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1246/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

10 consecutive years from the year in\nwhich such business will be operational or ready for operation. Therefore,\nthe disallowance proposed here to the extent of Rs.77,70,880/- and added\nback to the returned income of the assessee.”\n6.2 The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the facts of the case and\nsubmissions of the assessee gave his findings

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 1697/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2014-15
Section 115J

disallowed\nunder Rule 8D of the IT Rules and the disallowance has been made only\nunder clause (iii) of Rule 8D as per the formulae mentioned therein and\nthe same is not to be considered for the purpose of MAT and the\naddition, if any, made to the book profit on account of disallowance u/s\nPage 43\nITA

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

ITA 1248/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2014-15
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

10 consecutive years from the year in\nwhich such business will be operational or ready for operation. Therefore,\nthe disallowance proposed here to the extent of Rs.77,70,880/- and added\nback to the returned income of the assessee.\"\n6.2 The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the facts of the case and\nsubmissions of the assessee gave his findings

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 622/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2011-12
Section 115J

section 10\napplies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance of expenditure\ndebited in the profit and loss account as prepared under the Companies\nAct as neither any direct expenses nor any interest has been disallowed\nunder Rule 8D of the IT Rules and the disallowance has been made only\nunder clause (iii) of Rule

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 1696/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2013-14
Section 115J

section 10\napplies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance of expenditure\ndebited in the profit and loss account as prepared under the Companies\nAct as neither any direct expenses nor any interest has been disallowed\nunder Rule 8D of the IT Rules and the disallowance has been made only\nunder clause (iii) of Rule

M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

ITA 1899/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92B

46,72,000/- & Rs. 58,78,000/- u/s 14A of the Act towards expenditure related to exempt income. Ld. AO examined the quantification of the said disallowance but was not satisfied and observed that the company managed its investment portfolio by using the common establishment/infrastructure and therefore, it is not possible to justify the working adopted for computing the disallowance

M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

ITA 1854/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92B

46,72,000/- & Rs. 58,78,000/- u/s 14A of the Act towards expenditure related to exempt income. Ld. AO examined the quantification of the said disallowance but was not satisfied and observed that the company managed its investment portfolio by using the common establishment/infrastructure and therefore, it is not possible to justify the working adopted for computing the disallowance

DCIT EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA vs. B P PODDAR FOUNDATION FOR EDUCATION, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 637/KOL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.637/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year. : 2022-2023) Dcit Exemptions Circle-1(1), Vs B P Poddar Foundation For Education, Kolkata 18, Poddar Court, Rabindra Sarani, Kolkata-700071 Pan No. :Aaatb 5418 M (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiayn, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 18/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 23.12.2024, Passed By The Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-9, Mumbai For A.Y.2022- 2023. 2. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue & Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. 3. The Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Delayed By 26 Days For Which The Revenue Has Filed The Necessary Condonation Petition. The Reasons Given Are Plausible & Same Are Accepted. Accordingly, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. 4. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld.Ar Has Filed His Written Submission Which Read As Under :- Before The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata "A" Bench. Kolkata.

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiayn, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengupta, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

46,390/- was raised on the Appellant Trust. Copy of the Response of the Assesee Trust along with the Intimation u/s 143(1) dated 04/04/2023 is enclosed as under: "Annexure E: Response of Appellant Trust" - Pg 52 "Annexure F: Intimation u/s 143(1) dated 04/04/2023 for the A.Y.2022-23."-Pgs 53 -62 2.3. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) after considering

MAYURAKSHI GRAMIN BANK EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND, PBGB REGIONAL, ,SURI, BIRBHUM vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 3, SURI, SURI, BIRBHUM

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

ITA 1159/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1159/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Mayurakshi Gramin Bank Employees Provident Fund,………………………………………Appellant Pbgb Regional, Suri Birbhum-731101, West Bengal [Pan:Aabtm2580Q] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,……...Respondent Circle-3, Suri, Aayakar Bhawan, Lalkuthipara, Suri, Birbhum-731101, W.B. Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsian, Advocate & Ms. Lata Goyal, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Subhro Das, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: January 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: January 31, 2025 O R D E R

Section 10Section 10(25)Section 10(25)(ii)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 254

disallowed in assessment year 2013-14. The said issue came up before the ITAT for assessment year 2013-14, wherein the assesese raised alternative plea of its correct taxable income for the first time and, therefore, the matter was restored back to the file of ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. Assessing Officer did not accept the plea of the assessee

DCIT,CC-2(2), AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA vs. ARYAN MINING AND TRADING CORPORATION LIMITED, HIDE LANE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1177/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm & Shri Rakesh Mishra, Am Aryan Mining & Trading Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Corporation Limited, 110, Shantipally, 4 Th Floor, P-1, Hide Lane, Johar Building, Vs. Pin-700073, West Bengal Pin-700073, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aadca7247B Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tulsian, Ar Revenue By : Shri Praveen Kishore, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, DR
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

46,36,000/- and disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D of the IT Rules amounting to ₹6,07,60,388/-. 04. Aggrieved by the said order assessee preferred the appeal before the ld. CIT (A), wherein the appeal of the assessee has been partly allowed. 05. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Revenue preferred an appeal before

M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 1406/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2013-14
Section 115J

section 115JB of the\nAct is a self-contained code and only the disallowances mentioned in\nthe explanation could have been made. Further, clause (f) of\nExplanation 1 to section 115JB of the Act refers to the amount or\namounts of expenditure relatable to any income to which section 10\napplies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance

COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 467/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2012-13
Section 115J

section 115JB of the\nAct is a self-contained code and only the disallowances mentioned in\nthe explanation could have been made. Further, clause (f) of\nExplanation 1 to section 115JB of the Act refers to the amount or\namounts of expenditure relatable to any income to which section 10\napplies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance

EIH LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI, KOLKATA

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

ITA 498/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

10,32,739/- on this account. However, the Ld. AO applied Rule 8D of the I.T. Rules and disallowed the impugned amount. The Ld. AR pointed out that in the appellant’s own case for AY 2013-14 (ITA No. 2225/Kol/2017, para 5.3 of this order) it has been held that the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, r.w. Rule

EIH LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 181/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

10,32,739/- on this account. However, the Ld. AO applied Rule 8D of the I.T. Rules and disallowed the impugned amount. The Ld. AR pointed out that in the appellant’s own case for AY 2013-14 (ITA No. 2225/Kol/2017, para 5.3 of this order) it has been held that the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, r.w. Rule

M/S COAL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA

ITA 1407/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2014-15
Section 115J

section 10\napplies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance of expenditure\ndebited in the profit and loss account as prepared under the Companies\nAct as neither any direct expenses nor any interest has been disallowed\nunder Rule 8D of the IT Rules and the disallowance has been made only\nunder clause (iii) of Rule

DCIT(EXEMPTION), CIRCLE 1(1) KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. HOOGHLY RIVER BRIDGE COMMISSIONER, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1148/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. Nos.1147 & 1148/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2012-11 & 2013-14

Section 11Section 111Section 12ASection 250

disallowed the expenditure incurred on infrastructure development work, treating the same as capital in nature. AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14 5. The Ld. counsel, at this stage, stated that initially, when the assessee received grant for the first time before the year 1992, the same was booked as loan in the books of account of the assessee and thereafter

DCIT(EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. HOOGHLY RIVER BRIDGE COMMISSIONER, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1147/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. Nos.1147 & 1148/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2012-11 & 2013-14

Section 11Section 111Section 12ASection 250

disallowed the expenditure incurred on infrastructure development work, treating the same as capital in nature. AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14 5. The Ld. counsel, at this stage, stated that initially, when the assessee received grant for the first time before the year 1992, the same was booked as loan in the books of account of the assessee and thereafter