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.

296 results for “disallowance”+ Section 178clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai942Delhi874Bangalore297Kolkata296Chennai226Ahmedabad213Jaipur135Hyderabad115Indore86Pune75Chandigarh69Raipur67Cochin53Lucknow41Surat36Ranchi35Calcutta35Guwahati29Amritsar28Allahabad25Karnataka17Telangana17Cuttack17Nagpur14Visakhapatnam13Jodhpur13Rajkot12SC8Agra6Dehradun6Varanasi6Patna6Jabalpur3Panaji2Kerala1Rajasthan1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Uttarakhand1Punjab & Haryana1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 36(1)(va)92Disallowance77Section 143(3)66Addition to Income57Section 25054Section 143(1)48Deduction47Section 14A46Section 43B45Section 40

DCIT, CC-1(3), KOLKATA vs. M/S RUNGTA MINES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2199/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A No.2199/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Acit, Cc-1(3), Kolkata Vs. M/S Rungta Mines Pvt. Ltd. 8A, Express Tower, 42A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcr6463N (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Paul, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37

disallowed by invoking the provisions of explanation to section 37(1) of the Act. Relevant portion of his order is reproduced herein below:- “ I have considered the finding of the AO on this issue in the assessment order and the submission made by the AR during the appellate proceedings. I find that my predecessor has given a detailed finding

Showing 1–20 of 296 · Page 1 of 15

...
30
Section 6827
TDS15

DCIT, CC-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. RUNGTA MINES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1531/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2018AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tiwari, CIT, ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate
Section 37(1)

disallowed by invoking the provisions of explanation to section 37(1) of the Act. Relevant portion of his order is reproduced herein below:- “ I have considered the finding of the AO on this issue in the assessment order and the submission made by the AR during the appellate proceedings. I find that my predecessor has given a detailed finding

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TATA METALIKS LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1143/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ashish Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 115JSection 43B

disallowed the claim of assessee and added to the total amount of subsidy received by it while calculating the tax under Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) provision. 11. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The assessee before Ld. CIT(A) submitted that incentive was received by it on account of sales tax remission

TATA METALIKS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 788/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ashish Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 115JSection 43B

disallowed the claim of assessee and added to the total amount of subsidy received by it while calculating the tax under Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) provision. 11. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The assessee before Ld. CIT(A) submitted that incentive was received by it on account of sales tax remission

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 116/KOL/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

section 2(22)(e) of the Act and allow these common grounds of appeal raised by the assessee against the addition made u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. 31. The next common issue for our consideration is disallowance u/s 2(24)(x) of the Act at Rs. 27,126/- and at Rs. 53,507/- for Assessment Years

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 117/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

section 2(22)(e) of the Act and allow these common grounds of appeal raised by the assessee against the addition made u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. 31. The next common issue for our consideration is disallowance u/s 2(24)(x) of the Act at Rs. 27,126/- and at Rs. 53,507/- for Assessment Years

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 118/KOL/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

section 2(22)(e) of the Act and allow these common grounds of appeal raised by the assessee against the addition made u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. 31. The next common issue for our consideration is disallowance u/s 2(24)(x) of the Act at Rs. 27,126/- and at Rs. 53,507/- for Assessment Years

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 119/KOL/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

section 2(22)(e) of the Act and allow these common grounds of appeal raised by the assessee against the addition made u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. 31. The next common issue for our consideration is disallowance u/s 2(24)(x) of the Act at Rs. 27,126/- and at Rs. 53,507/- for Assessment Years

USHA MARTIN VENTURES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 847/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2009-10 Usha Martin Ventures V/S. Dcit, Circle-6 Ltd., 24, R.N.Mukherjee Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Road, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata- Chowringhee Squre, 700 001 Kolkata-700 069 [Pan No.Aaacu 3843 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 48Section 50(2)

section 14A of the Act then the only course available for working out the amount disallowable is the application of Rule 8D of the IT Rules. Before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee submitted that the AO has without recording his satisfaction regarding the working of the assessee has directly invoked the provisions of rule 8D which is not correct

ACIT, CIRCLE - 13(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. PADMA LOGISTICS & KHANIJ PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 606/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2020AY 2010-11

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 14ASection 2

disallowance of rent upto Rs.2,16,000/- as against Rs. 11,82,000/- without appreciating the observation of the A.O. 5) That the appellant craves leave to add modify or alter any of the grounds of appeal and/ or adduce additional evidence at the time of hearing of the case.” 2 Padma Logistics & Khanij

ACIT, CIRCLE -51, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRI TAPAS PAUL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 28/KOL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri N.V. Vasudevan

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 194CSection 263Section 40

section 194C in his case while examining the payments to labour at Rs.90,12,960/- and ultimately disallowing the entire sum u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessment order was passed u/s.144 of the Act. In the Remand proceedings the assessee filed details of payment made to labour and enclosed sample labour payment sheets. In the Remand Proceedings

DCIT, CC-XIX, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S INTERNATIONAL CONVEYORS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in IT(SS)A No

ITA 1366/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Dr. A.L.Saini, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm It(Ss)A No.131/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-2009) Dcit, Cc-Xix, Kolkata Vs. M/S.International Conveyors Pvt.Ltd.,10,Middletion Row, Kolkata-700071 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaci 6161 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Dcit, Cc-Xix, Kolkata Vs. M/S International Conveyors Pvt.Ltd.,10,Middletion Row, Kolkata-700071 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaci 6161 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) It(Ss)A No.90/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-2010) Dcit, Cc-Xix, Kolkata Vs. M/S International Conveyors Pvt.Ltd.,10,Middletion Row, Kolkata-700071 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaci 6161 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) It(Ss)A No.91/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Dcit, Cc-Xix, Kolkata Vs. M/S International Conveyors Pvt.Ltd.,10,Middletion Row, Kolkata-700071 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaci 6161 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) It(Ss)A No.92/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-2012) Dcit, Cc-Xix, Kolkata Vs. M/S International Conveyors Pvt.Ltd.,10,Middletion Row, Kolkata-700071 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaci 6161 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 153Section 153ASection 43BSection 80

section 80- lA. 4. That the Department craves leave to add, modify or alter any of the grounds of appeal and/or adduce additional evidence at the time of hearing of the case. 5. The first ground relates to expenditure attributable to dividend (exempted income) to be disallowed as an expenditure u/s.14A of the Income

M/S CHENGMARI TEA CO. LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-4, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1433/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri S.M.Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amitava Bhattacharyya, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 14A

178/- III. ½% of Average Investment 43,556/- Total 72,734/- Since the assessee has already disallowed a sum of Rs.10,000/- the AO added a sum of Rs.62,734/- to the total income of the assessee and made disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. 5. Before CIT(A) the assesee submitted that the AO has not found the quantum

M/S. R. S. SOFTWARE (INDIA) LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 741/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am M/S. R.S. Software (India) Ltd. Vs. Acit/Cir-2(2), Kolkata A-2, Fmc Fortuna, 234/3A, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kol-20. Pan/Gir No.: Aabcr 7813 G (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Sriram, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14A

section 14A, other than what the assessee had suo-moto disallowed. (2) Ground No.3 raised by the assessee relates to additions made with respect to unbilled revenue to the tune of Rs. 17,44,27,000/-, which is already included in the revenue/income of the company. 4. We shall first take-up additions challenged on account of Transfer Pricing Adjustment

JANKALYAN VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of assessees are dismissed

ITA 776/KOL/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 776/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Jankalyan Vinimay Pvt. Ltd.,...................Appellant 10, West Ghosh Para Lane, Jagatdal, 24-Parganas (North)-743125, West Bengal [Pan: Aabcj8598E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax........Respondent Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan (Poorva), 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 48/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Sunbeam Vanijya Pvt. Ltd.,.........................Appellant 21A, Shakespeare Sarani, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700017 [Pan: Aakcs1284P] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax.........Respondent Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan (Poorva), 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107

Section 143(1)Section 263

178, therefore, it be construed that the issue was not debatable and disallowance under section 143(1) could be made

SUNBEAM VANIJYA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of assessees are dismissed

ITA 48/KOL/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 776/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Jankalyan Vinimay Pvt. Ltd.,...................Appellant 10, West Ghosh Para Lane, Jagatdal, 24-Parganas (North)-743125, West Bengal [Pan: Aabcj8598E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax........Respondent Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan (Poorva), 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 48/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Sunbeam Vanijya Pvt. Ltd.,.........................Appellant 21A, Shakespeare Sarani, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700017 [Pan: Aakcs1284P] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax.........Respondent Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan (Poorva), 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107

Section 143(1)Section 263

178, therefore, it be construed that the issue was not debatable and disallowance under section 143(1) could be made

DCIT, LTU-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S CENTURY PLYBOARDS (I), LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objections of assessee are allowed

ITA 2149/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

disallowance . The assessee's instant substantive ground is accepted. The Assessing Officer is direction to verify all the relevant facts and allow the impugned cess (es) as deduction u/s 37 of the Act. The assessee's appeal I.T.A. No. 685/Ko/2014 is partly accepted in above terms." However, the ld. DR for the Revenue submitted before the Bench that the Income

BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 462/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35(1)(i)Section 43BSection 56(2)(x)Section 80J

Disallowance of prior period expenses. 13. We note that the revenue audit team has pointed out certain objections during the course of audit before the ld. Assessing Officer and then ld. Assessing Officer proposed these issues to the ld. PCIT to invoke jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act. We have also examined the audit objections raised by the audit

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-4, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ROSSELL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2774/KOL/2013[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year:2009-10 Dcit, Circle-4, Kolkata V/S. M/S Rossell India Ltd. P-7, Chowringhee 21/1A/3, Darga Road, Square, Kolkata-69 Jindal Towers, Block B, 4Th Floor, Park Circus, Kolkta-700 017 [Pan Noaabcr 3736 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

section 14A of the Act, in this regard we find that the assessee in the year under consideration has earned dividend income but no expense was disallowed by the assessee in its return of income. The assessee has made the disallowance during the course of assessment proceedings when the issue was raised by the AO. It was also submitted that

N.N. ISPAT PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 2(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1033/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 143(3)Section 250

Disallowance under section Rs. 10,178/- 36(1)(va) read with Rule 8D (ii) Disallowance under section Rs. 3,76,686 14A (iii) Undisclosed