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.

55 results for “disallowance”+ Section 144Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi112Mumbai87Chennai70Kolkata55Allahabad37Bangalore35Pune21Lucknow15Jaipur15Chandigarh13Patna8Surat8Raipur7Ahmedabad7Rajkot6Agra5Indore3Karnataka3Cochin2Amritsar2Jabalpur1Ranchi1Visakhapatnam1Hyderabad1

Key Topics

Section 263186Section 143(3)82Addition to Income27Revision u/s 26324Section 143(2)23Disallowance19Section 613Section 19213Section 5(2)13Section 14A

PHILIPS INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-IV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1142/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Mar 2019AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1142/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Philips India Limited..........……………………………………....………………..…………………….….Appellant Earlier Known As Philips Electronics India Limited 7 No. Justice Chandra Madhab Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aabcp 9487 A] Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - Iv, Kolkata…….............…....................…...Respondent Appearances By: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate & Shri Navneet Misra, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 10Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 27Th, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :-

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

144A and applied by the Assessing Officer it could not be revised and hence is rejected.” 9.1. A perusal of the above case-law shows that, it can be said that the DRP is also discharging a function of an assessing officer and the assessment order still remains that of the Assessing Officer, though it incorporates the directions

Showing 1–20 of 55 · Page 1 of 3

12
Deduction10
Section 689

GRAPHITE INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 1013/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 263(1)Section 40A(2)(b)

disallowance. 7 Assessment Year : 2014-2015 Graphite India Limited 9. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Before we embark upon an enquiry on the facts and issues agitated before us to find out whether the action u/s 263 of the Act, deserves to be taken against the assessee or not, it is pertinent

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. DDIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

ITA 2082/KOL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C

disallowed u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act. In reply, the Assessee submitted that:- • Payments made by the Assessee to Appledore was not taxable in India in terms of section 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act; • Without prejudice to the above, payments made by the Assessee to Appledore was not FTS in terms of Article

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

ITA 1489/KOL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C

disallowed u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act. In reply, the Assessee submitted that:- • Payments made by the Assessee to Appledore was not taxable in India in terms of section 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act; • Without prejudice to the above, payments made by the Assessee to Appledore was not FTS in terms of Article

IMC LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1006/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

144A; (ii) an order made by the Joint Commissioner in exercise of the powers or in the performance of the functions of an Assessing Officer conferred on, or assigned to, him under the orders or directions issued by the Board or by the Chief Commissioner or Director General or Commissioner authorized by the Board in this behalf under section

AC CONSTRUCTION,KOLKATA vs. ITO, KOLKATA

In the result, Grounds No

ITA 374/KOL/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 194CSection 40

144A; (ii) an order made by the Joint Commissioner in exercise of the powers or in the performance of the functions of an Assessing Officer conferred on, or assigned to, him under the orders or directions issued by the Board or by the Chief Commissioner or Director General or Commissioner authorized by the Board in this behalf under section

M/S KINNOR KINNOREE,KOLKATA vs. CIT-X, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 176/KOL/2022[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

144A; (ii) an order made by the Joint Commissioner in exercise of the powers or in the performance of the functions of an Assessing Officer conferred on, or assigned to, him under the orders or directions issued by the Board or by the Chief Commissioner or Director General or Commissioner authorized by the Board in this behalf under section

ITO, WARD - 11(3), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. LNB RENEWABLE ENERGY PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

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

ITA 2011/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

disallowances:  Share premium charged on fresh issue of equity shares (section 56(2)(viib) of the Act) - Rs 5,00,000/-  Share premium charged on fresh issue of preference shares (section 56(2)(viib) of the Act) - Rs 8,00,00,000/- Aggrieved by the assessment order, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

M/S. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 805/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act was not made by the A.O keeping in view the circular No. 5/2014 (F.No. 225/182/2013-ITA.II) dated 11-02-2014 as well as provisions laid down in the Act. (d) It is seen from clause 17 of TAR that the assesse did not take valuation of properly sold as per provisions of section

DIAMOND BEVERAGES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-2, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 208/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 208/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Diamond Beverages Private Limited Pr. Cit, Kolkata - 2 P-41, Taratala Road Vs Taratala Kolkata – 700 088 Pan : Aabcd3346C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : S. Agarwal, Aca Revenue By : Md. Ghayas Uddin, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/07/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/07/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Rajpal Yadav:

For Appellant: S. Agarwal, ACAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, CIT, D/R
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 37Section 80G

disallowed under sec 37 of the Act can be claimed as deductible under sec 80G of the Act. Revisionary assessment proceedings cannot be initiated unless the conjunctive conditions of section 263 of the Act are satisfied Section 263(1) of the Act states that: "The Principal Commissioner or The Commissioner may call for and examine the record of any proceeding

PANJIT BASAK,KOLKATA vs. ITO, KOLKATA

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

ITA 358/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

144A of the Act may be invoked in suitable cases. To prevent possibility of fishing and roving enquiries in such cases, it is desirable that these cases should invariably be picked up while conducting Review or Inspection by the administrative authorities. Page 10 of 22 I.T.A. No.: 358/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Panjit Basak. 7. The above Instruction shall

SAHEBGANJ NO.1 ANCHALIK SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 2(3), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 36/KOL/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jul 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P(2)

disallowed deduction under section 80P(2) on this amount. 3 Assessment Year : 2017-2018 Sahebganj No. 1 Anchalik Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited 5. The ld. Pr. Commissioner has perused the assessment order as well as the record and formed an opinion that during demonetisation period, assessee has deposited a sum of Rs.65,08,500/- in cash in two Bank

M/S. PEARL TRACOM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-4, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 495/KOL/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 263

144A; (ii) an order made by the Joint Commissioner in exercise of the powers or in the performance of the functions of an Assessing Officer conferred on, or assigned to, him under the orders or directions issued by the Board or by the Chief Commissioner or Director General or Commissioner authorized by the Board in this behalf under section

BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD,BANGALORE vs. PCIT-1, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 150/KOL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2022AY 2016-17
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35

disallowed the said expense holding it to be expenditure pertaining to the earlier year. On appeal, the Hon’ble High Court held that since the assessee was following the mercantile system of accounting, the assessee could claim the deduction of the liability created in its books based on the admission of liability. The Court held that

ACIT, CIRCLE - 31, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PRADYUMNA DALMIA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1280/KOL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Mukherjee, JCIT, ld. Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri R.N Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &
Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 14A

section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules and disallowed Rs. 3,41,676/- which was upheld by the Learned CIT(A) on first appeal. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us on the following ground:- “1. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case learned Commissioner of Income

SRIMANTA KUMAR SHIT,PURBA MEDINAPORE vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 27(2), HALDIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1911/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 1911/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Srimanta Kumar Shit,………………...…………Appellant Rangamalaput, Junput-Contai, Purba Medinapore-721450, West Bengal [Pan:Bffps3635Q] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax..…Respondent Circle-27(2), Haldia, Basudebpur, Talpukur, Khanjan Chak, Haldia, Midnapore-721101, W.B. Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Lata Goyal, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 22, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 19, 2024 O R D E R

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

Disallowance of Trawler related Rs.1,14,97,589/- expenses and depreciation Addition on account of sundry Rs. 12,55,30,136/- creditors 3 Srimanta Kumar Shit Addition u/s 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Rs.29,68,865/- Act Addition on account of Fixed Rs.2,46,573/- deposit u/s 69A 6. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before

JAI SALASAR BALAJI INDUSTRIES(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per the terms indicated above

ITA 440/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 440/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jai Salasar Balaji Industries (P) Ltd. Acit, Central Circle – 4(1), Kolkata 5, Bentinck Street Vs Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaacj6970D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tulsiyan, Fca Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20/06/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/08/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Kolkata -2, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Pr. Cit”) Dt. 28/03/2023, Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Private Limited Company Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Of Steel. E-Return Filed On 27/10/2018 Declaring Total Income At Nil For The Assessment Year 2018-19. Case Selected For Through Cass Followed By Issuance Of Notice U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act. Details Were Called For In Respect Of The Reason Of Scrutiny Selection. The Assessee Complied By Filing All The Relevant Details & The Same Were Duly Examined By The Assessing Officer & He Came To The Conclusion That The Assessee Was Entitled To The Claim Of Carry Forward Of Loss To 2

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT, D/R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

disallowed. 8. Before proceeding to examine the issues stated above, we find that the provision of Section 263 of the Act has direct bearing on the 6 I.T.A. No. 440/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jai Salasar Balaji Industries (P) Ltd. issue raised before us, therefore, it is pertinent to take note of this section which reads as under

KGVK AGRO LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, KOLKATA-2., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 549/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 549/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Kgvk Agro Limited,..................................Appellant Block-A, 3Rd Floor, Flat-3, 46B, Sridhar Roy Road, Kolkata-700039 [Pan: Aaacu9032H] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Kolkata-2, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Anuj Masaddi, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit (Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 25, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 19, 2024

Section 115BSection 2Section 263Section 68

disallowance of Gratuity Provision of Rs.2,50,434/-; (b) addition of Rs.67,61,080/- on account of suppressed sales. 5. The ld. Commissioner gone through the assessment record and formed an opinion that the receipt of suppressed sale ought to have been added under section 68 of the Income Tax Act as undisclosed cash credit, which is chargeable

M/S RANI SATI AGRO TECH PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-12(3), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 85/KOL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT D/R
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263Section 68

disallowance of preliminary expenses amounting to Rs.18,634/-. Subsequently, the ld. Pr. CIT invoked the provisions of Section 263 of the Act and framed order dt. 02/12/2015 holding that the assessment order dt. 14/03/2015 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the I.T.A. No. 85/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2012-13 M/s. Rani Sati Agro Tech Pvt. Ltd. 4 revenue

K.R.OVERSEAS PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-(CENTRAL)-2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per the terms indicated above

ITA 185/KOL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 68

disallowed the claim of actual loss incurred from sale of equity shares of Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. amounting to Rs. 67,66,493/-. He submitted that books of accounts are audited u/s 44AB of the Act, complete details were filed before ld. AO on various occasions and the assessee company being a non-banking finance company claimed such