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.

209 results for “disallowance”+ Section 153(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,780Delhi1,699Chennai562Bangalore476Jaipur293Hyderabad231Ahmedabad224Kolkata209Chandigarh160Surat148Pune146Indore140Cochin121Amritsar102Raipur88Lucknow46Karnataka45Allahabad43Guwahati43Nagpur41Cuttack37Rajkot34Visakhapatnam25Jodhpur23Dehradun20Patna17SC12Telangana10Calcutta8Agra5Panaji4Ranchi3Jabalpur3Gauhati2Varanasi2Punjab & Haryana2Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)101Section 14884Section 14A79Section 14772Addition to Income68Disallowance50Deduction38Section 80I36Section 25028Section 115J

DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. MCNALLY BHARAT ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

ITA 98/KOL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Oct 2015AY 2002-03

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

Section 143(3)Section 144

5 were rejected being devoid of any merit. Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) accepting the books of account of the assessee was upheld by the Tribunal. As regards the issues involved in Grounds No. 6 to 9 of the Revenue’s appeal relating to the I.T.A. No. 98/KOL./2011 Assessment year: 2002-2003 & C.O. No. 12/KOL/2011

DCIT, CIRCLE - 48, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SANJAY JAISWAL, HOWRAH

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is allowed , appeals of the assessee and revenue are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1649/KOL/2010[2004-05]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 209 · Page 1 of 11

...
26
Section 153A26
Depreciation22
ITAT Kolkata
23 Mar 2016
AY 2004-05

Bench: : Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gopal Ram Sharma, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Debasish Lahiri, JCIT, ld. Sr.DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153(3)Section 254

section 153(2A) , therefore, would apply. While such an order was served on the Commissioner on August 3, 1994, within a period of two years of the end of such financial year, a fresh order of assessment had to be passed by the Assessing Officer. The same not having been done, in our view, such proceedings have become timebarred

BISWANATH HOSIERY MILLS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 4(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 470/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Aayush Kedia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahare Yogesh Prabhakar, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

153 taxmann.com 19 (Kolkata - Trib.) - Disallowance of expenses under section 14A read with rule 8D shall not exceed exempt income earned during relevant assessment year. A.Y. 2017-18 Biswanath Hosiery Mills Ltd 3. Joint Investments (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [59 taxmann.com 295 (Delhi HC)]: In this landmark case, the Delhi High Court ruled that disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed

DCIT, CC-3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMICUS REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 803/KOL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

5. We have heard learned counsel for the respective parties at length. 8 I.T.A. No. 803/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Amicus Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. The question which is posed for consideration in the present set of appeals is, as to whether in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments, whether the jurisdiction of AO to make assessment is confined to incriminating

M/S PRICEWATERHOUSE COOPERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2298/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 May 2020AY 2011-2012

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Pricewaterhouse Coopers Private Limited……...............................……………………......Appellant Block-Ep, Plot –Y14 Salt Lake City Sector-V Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan : Aabcp 9181 H] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata……..........................…....Appellant Appearances By: Shri Kanchun Kaushal, A/R & Shri Bikash Kr. Jain, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Vijay Shankar, Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 25Th, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 29Th, 2020 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 144C(13)

153 of the Act read with Explanation 1(viii) and proviso appended below to Explanation 1 of that section. 1(viii) and proviso appended below to Explanation 1 of that section. 1(viii) and proviso appended below to Explanation 1 of that section. 2.1. On the facts and in law and in the circumstances of the case

M/S RECKITT BENCKISER (I) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, R-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1671/KOL/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 May 2016AY 2003-2004

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

Section 40

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of assessee’s claim for deduction under section 80IA to the I.T.A. Nos. 1671/KOL./2008 & 1024/KOL/2009 Assessment years: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005 & I.T.A. Nos. 1699/KOL/2008 & 973/KOL/2009 Assessment years: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005 Page 20 of 34 extent of Rs.47,34,361/- and upholding the same, we dismiss Ground

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

153 (Delhi - Trib.)\nin Para 6.\ne. Further reliance is places in case of On Mobile Global Ltd. v.\nAdditional Commissioner of Income-tax [2014] 45 taxmann.com 346\n(Bangalore -Trib.) it was held that Professional charges paid for\nconducting due diligence for acquisition of another company which\nwas to be acquired is allowed as a revenue expenditure

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
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

153 (Delhi - Trib.)\nin Para 6.\ne. Further reliance is places in case of On Mobile Global Ltd. v.\nAdditional Commissioner of Income-tax [2014] 45 taxmann.com 346\n(Bangalore -Trib.) it was held that Professional charges paid for\nconducting due diligence for acquisition of another company which\nwas to be acquired is allowed as a revenue expenditure

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee (in C

ITA 1048/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: DR. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Chidambaram, Advocate
Section 14ASection 92C

disallowed the loss holding it to be speculative loss in terms of Section 43(5) of the Act. 2. From the material documents and the explanations furnished, both before the Assessing Officer as well as before me, I find that during the relevant year, the appellant was engaged in the business of manufacture and export of engineering goods. From

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee (in C

ITA 1047/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: DR. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Chidambaram, Advocate
Section 14ASection 92C

disallowed the loss holding it to be speculative loss in terms of Section 43(5) of the Act. 2. From the material documents and the explanations furnished, both before the Assessing Officer as well as before me, I find that during the relevant year, the appellant was engaged in the business of manufacture and export of engineering goods. From

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee (in C

ITA 1049/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: DR. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Chidambaram, Advocate
Section 14ASection 92C

disallowed the loss holding it to be speculative loss in terms of Section 43(5) of the Act. 2. From the material documents and the explanations furnished, both before the Assessing Officer as well as before me, I find that during the relevant year, the appellant was engaged in the business of manufacture and export of engineering goods. From

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

153 (Delhi - Trib.)\nin Para 6.\ne. Further reliance is places in case of On Mobile Global Ltd. v.\nAdditional Commissioner of Income-tax [2014] 45 taxmann.com 346\n(Bangalore -Trib.) it was held that Professional charges paid for\nconducting due diligence for acquisition of another company which\nwas to be acquired is allowed as a revenue expenditure

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

153 (Delhi - Trib.)\nin Para 6.\ne. Further reliance is places in case of On Mobile Global Ltd. v.\nAdditional Commissioner of Income-tax [2014] 45 taxmann.com 346\n(Bangalore -Trib.) it was held that Professional charges paid for\nconducting due diligence for acquisition of another company which\nwas to be acquired is allowed as a revenue expenditure

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

disallowable under section 4O(a)(ii) or section 115-O of the Act.” 3. As the issues raised in these appeals are common and the facts are identical, therefore, as agreed by both the parties, they Page 7 of 41 I.T.A. No.: 1854/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 I.T.A. No.: 1899/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Tata Global Beverages Limited

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

disallowable under section 4O(a)(ii) or section 115-O of the Act.” 3. As the issues raised in these appeals are common and the facts are identical, therefore, as agreed by both the parties, they Page 7 of 41 I.T.A. No.: 1854/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 I.T.A. No.: 1899/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Tata Global Beverages Limited

M/S. GARG BROTHERS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2519/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

Section 45 M/s. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. M/s. Cliff TreximPvt. Ltd. M/s. Span Foundation Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2009-10 153 A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word `reassess’ to completed assessment proceedings. 61.So from the aforesaid dictum of law laid by the Hon’ble High Courtin the absence

M/S. CLIFF TREXIM PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2520/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

Section 45 M/s. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. M/s. Cliff TreximPvt. Ltd. M/s. Span Foundation Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2009-10 153 A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word `reassess’ to completed assessment proceedings. 61.So from the aforesaid dictum of law laid by the Hon’ble High Courtin the absence

M/S. SPAN FOUNDATION PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2521/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

Section 45 M/s. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. M/s. Cliff TreximPvt. Ltd. M/s. Span Foundation Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2009-10 153 A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word `reassess’ to completed assessment proceedings. 61.So from the aforesaid dictum of law laid by the Hon’ble High Courtin the absence

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TM INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of revenue are dismissed and cross objections of the assessee are allowed in part

ITA 1914/KOL/2008[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm]

For Respondent: Shri R. K. Kureel, JCIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 80I

section 153 of the Act, the assessee cannot be allowed to plead that the orders are barred by limitation and bad under law. We do not find any merit in these grounds and accordingly dismiss the same. Ground No 2 in Co 109/Kol/2008 16. AO disallowed the expenses relating to repairs and maintenance on a building located at Kolkata

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TM INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of revenue are dismissed and cross objections of the assessee are allowed in part

ITA 1513/KOL/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm]

For Respondent: Shri R. K. Kureel, JCIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 80I

section 153 of the Act, the assessee cannot be allowed to plead that the orders are barred by limitation and bad under law. We do not find any merit in these grounds and accordingly dismiss the same. Ground No 2 in Co 109/Kol/2008 16. AO disallowed the expenses relating to repairs and maintenance on a building located at Kolkata