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.

4,515 results for “disallowance”+ Section 143(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai16,463Delhi11,007Kolkata4,515Bangalore3,645Chennai3,286Ahmedabad3,277Pune2,245Hyderabad1,877Jaipur1,737Surat1,124Indore1,102Chandigarh890Cochin810Visakhapatnam688Rajkot581Raipur535Amritsar482Nagpur429Lucknow369Karnataka318Cuttack271Jodhpur245Panaji228Agra217Guwahati198Ranchi143Patna143Dehradun124Allahabad122Jabalpur98Telangana96Calcutta90Varanasi54SC44Kerala27Punjab & Haryana20Orissa8Himachal Pradesh6Rajasthan3Andhra Pradesh2Uttarakhand2Gauhati2H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Bombay1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Tripura1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)118Section 26380Addition to Income73Disallowance68Section 14A55Deduction42Section 4028Section 153A28Section 80I27Section 148

ACIT, CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ICI INDIA LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2568/KOL/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 10(33)Section 115JSection 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

disallowances. 4. The ld AR filed additional ground of appeal before us as below:- “That the notice issued under section 143(2) of the Act dated 18 November 2004 is of no consequence for the matter under consideration and no notice at all was issued under section 143(2) of the Act after filing the return of income in response

Showing 1–20 of 4,515 · Page 1 of 226

...
26
Section 14721
TDS12

ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2125/KOL/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 10(33)Section 115JSection 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

disallowances. 4. The ld AR filed additional ground of appeal before us as below:- “That the notice issued under section 143(2) of the Act dated 18 November 2004 is of no consequence for the matter under consideration and no notice at all was issued under section 143(2) of the Act after filing the return of income in response

M/S. FUTURE DISTRIBUTORS,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 9, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 277/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 263Section 40

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was made by the Assessing Officer in the assessment completed under section 143(3

M/S. BATA INDIA LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DDIT, CPC, , BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1073/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115Section 115PSection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(3)Section 250

disallowed under section 143(3). [Para 16] It followed that the effective and operative order was the one under section

MSTC LTD,KOLKATA vs. JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER, CIR-1(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 623/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Prasun Bhattacharya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 154Section 250

section 143(2). [Para 11] Regular assessment for the assessment years 1990-91 and 1992-93 under sec- tion 143(3) had been completed disallowing

KRISHNA PRASAD POTNURI,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 40(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 450/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Krishna Prasad Potnuri...............................................................…………………………………….…..Appellant (Prop. Calcutta South Transport Co.) 20, Phears Lance Bowbazar Kolkata – 700 012 [Pan : Afqpp 3888 Q] Income Tax Officer, Ward-40(1), Kolkata....................................................…………………..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S.M. Das, Addl. Cit, D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 6Th , 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 3Rd, 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(3)

143(3) determining the income of at Rs.2,19,26,760/-, interalia making a disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Act, for the reason that the assessee made cash payments for hiring trucks beyond the limits prescribed u/s 40A(3) of the Act. Aggrieved the assessee carried the matter in appeal. Before the ld. First Appellate Authority , he contended that

D.C.I.T CIR - 7,KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S BCH ELECTRIC LTD( FORMERLY M/S BHARTIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 634/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Vishwanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 148

section 143(3)/147 vide an order dated 29.12.2011, the total income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.3,08,58,683/- after disallowing

THE PEERLESS GEN. FIN. & INV. CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 892/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263Section 50

disallowed by the Assessing Officer in pursuance of the order passed by the concerned ld. CIT under section 263 of the Act. He also noted that an appeal was filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3

BINOD KUMAR MAHATO ,BURDWAN vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - BURDWAN , BURDWAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2173/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Feb 2021AY 2014-15
Section 144Section 250Section 263Section 271ASection 44A

section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 29.03.2014 after making Act vide order dated 29.03.2014 after making certain additions/ disallowances

GRAPHITE INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed as indicated above and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 398/KOL/2008[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2016AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 8Section 80HSection 80I

143(3) read with section 147 vide order dated 31.03.2006, the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 80IA was restricted by the Assessing Officer to Rs.3,51,52,890/-. In the said assessment, he also disallowed

ACIT, CIR-2, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR vs. S. N. CONSTRUCTION, BANKURA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1205/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm] I.T.A No. 1117/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2011-12 S.N. Construction -Vs- Acit, Circle-2, Durgapur [Pan: Abafs 9119 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1205/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Acit, Circle-2, Durgapur -Vs- S.N. Construction [Pan: Abafs 9119 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saikat Maulik, FCAFor Respondent: Gautam Kumar Mondal, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(3)

143(3) computing total income of the assessee at Rs. 1,04,758.80 paisa inter alia, disallowing an amount of Rs. 16,26,104/- u/s 40A(3) of S.N. Construction A.Yrs.2011-12 the Act and also disallowing the claim of bad and doubtful debts of Rs. 15,62,369/- and also sadding an amount

S. N. CONSTRUCTION,BANKURA vs. ACIT, CIR-2, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1117/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm] I.T.A No. 1117/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2011-12 S.N. Construction -Vs- Acit, Circle-2, Durgapur [Pan: Abafs 9119 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1205/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Acit, Circle-2, Durgapur -Vs- S.N. Construction [Pan: Abafs 9119 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saikat Maulik, FCAFor Respondent: Gautam Kumar Mondal, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(3)

143(3) computing total income of the assessee at Rs. 1,04,758.80 paisa inter alia, disallowing an amount of Rs. 16,26,104/- u/s 40A(3) of S.N. Construction A.Yrs.2011-12 the Act and also disallowing the claim of bad and doubtful debts of Rs. 15,62,369/- and also sadding an amount

SRI GOPINATH GHORAI,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ACIT, CIR-27, HALDIA, HALDIA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1/KOL/2016[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Sri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A No. 01/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: G.Banerjee, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT,Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 194Section 194CSection 40

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and made disallowance of Rs.1,12,73,615/- on account of tanker hire charges in the assessment completed u/s 143(3

AWAS DEVCON PVT. LTD. ,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD-14(4), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

ITA 1217/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Bansal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Dutta, DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

143(3) of the Act dated 30.12.2017 making addition of ₹3,14,43,700/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act. 06. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) simply confirmed the order of the ld. AO. The ld. CIT (A) in the appellate proceedings dismissed the appeal of the assessee by giving a cryptic finding in Para no.6.10

AWAS DEVCON PVT. LTD. ,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD-13(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

ITA 1216/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Bansal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Dutta, DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

143(3) of the Act dated 30.12.2017 making addition of ₹3,14,43,700/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act. 06. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) simply confirmed the order of the ld. AO. The ld. CIT (A) in the appellate proceedings dismissed the appeal of the assessee by giving a cryptic finding in Para no.6.10

M/S. INDIAN ROADWAYS CORPORATION LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, CENTRAL - 1, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

ITA 787/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Vs. Principal Commissioner Of M/S Indian Roadways Corporation Ltd. Income Tax, Central-I, Irc House, 1, Sunyat Sen Street, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Kolkata-700012. Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaci 7333 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Srihari, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 263Section 36

143(3) of the Act dated 27/12/2011, the said disallowance was not considered by the Ld. AO in the order passed u/s 13 M/s Indian Roadways Corporation Ltd. A.Y: 2009-10 153A/143(3) of the Act, dated 31/03/2016. The ld counsel submitted that the same may be rectified by the Ld. AO as per section

SARDA MINES PVT. LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-05(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 867/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 867/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Sarda Mines Pvt. Ltd...............................………………………………………………Appellant 6Th Floor, Circular Court, 8, Ajc Bose Road, Kolkata – 700017. [Pan : Aahcs 2419 R] D.C.I.T., Cir 5(2) Kolkata………………………………………………......................Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 69 Appearances By: Shri A.K. Gupta, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Md. Usman, Cit Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 21, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 14, 2017 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Principal Cit – 2, Kolkata Dated 28.03.2017 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Therein Read As Under: “1. For That The Order Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax -2, Kolkata (In Short ‘Cit’) Dated 28.03.2017 Is Without Jurisdiction & Illegal As None Of The Condition Precedent For Exercise Of The Power Under Section 263 Of The Act Exists And/Or Has Been Satisfied & As Such The Said Order Is Erroneous & Without Jurisdiction & Liable To Be Cancelled. 2. For That The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Was Not In Any Way Erroneous Or Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & As Such The Cit Would Not Exercise Any Power Under Section 263 Of The Act. The Cit Erred In Holding That The Order Of Assessment Is Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue.

Section 263Section 35A

section 143(3) for the year under consideration was subsequently reopened by the Assessing Officer only on the issue of disallowance

INFOSOFT GLOBAL P LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 1(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 501/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

disallowed under section 143(3). [Para 16] It followed that the effective and operative order was the one under section

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1005/KOL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

section 143(2) of the Act, will not make the reassessment null & void in law, which is validly initiated u/s. 148 of the Act. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the reopening assessment u/s. 147 of the I. T. Act as notice u/s. 148 was issued after taking necessary approval from

DIPAK KUMAR DASBHOWMIK,PASCHIM MIDNAPORE vs. I.T.O., WARD - 38(1), MIDNAPORE , PASCHIM MIDNAPORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2384/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

section 143(3)/147, the issue raised in Ground No. 4 of the assessee’s appeal relating to the disallowance