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.

159 results for “disallowance”+ Section 234Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,256Delhi866Bangalore582Ahmedabad204Kolkata159Chennai116Jaipur108Hyderabad86Pune74Nagpur50Indore48Rajkot32Raipur30Allahabad28Surat25Chandigarh22Lucknow22Agra20Karnataka14Jodhpur9Dehradun9Visakhapatnam8Amritsar8Patna4SC3Cochin2Cuttack2Jabalpur2Telangana2Ranchi1Punjab & Haryana1Panaji1Guwahati1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 143(1)63Section 143(3)56Addition to Income54Disallowance50Section 234B46Section 14A40Section 234C38Deduction34Section 115J32Section 250

HINDUSTAN MOTORS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 171/KOL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

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

Section 14A

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) on account of interest under section 14A while deciding Ground No. 1 involved in this appeal of the assessee. Consequently this ground is treated as allowed. 13. As regards the issue involved in Ground No. 3 relating to the assessee’s claim for allowing MAT credit against

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

Showing 1–20 of 159 · Page 1 of 8

...
28
Section 26321
TDS18
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92B

disallowance as computed under subsection (2) & (3) for the purpose of Section 14A can be applied while making adjustment under clause (f) of Section 115JB. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the following decisions: Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT -vs.- Jayshree Tea & Industries Ltd. [G.A. No. 1501 of 2014 dated

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

disallowance as computed under subsection (2) & (3) for the purpose of Section 14A can be applied while making adjustment under clause (f) of Section 115JB. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the following decisions: Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT -vs.- Jayshree Tea & Industries Ltd. [G.A. No. 1501 of 2014 dated

HALDIA PETROCHEMICALS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 12(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 2114/KOL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

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

Section 115JSection 32

disallowance under section 14A to 1% of the exempt dividend income. Ground No. 4 of the assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2006-07 is thus partly allowed. 11. Ground No. 5 raised in the appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2006-07 is an additional ground, which involves the issue relating to the levy of interest under section 234D

M/S. TCG LIFESCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2169/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92C

disallowing an amount of Rs. 3,924 paid as interest on service tax. 6. Interest under section 2348 of the Act 6.1. The Ld. AO erred in levying Rs.23,24,948 as interest under section 234B of the Act. 7. Interest under section 234C

ORIENT PAPER & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 170/KOL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2015AY 2008-09

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

Section 143(3)Section 14A

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D. Ground No. 1 is accordingly allowed. 3. As regards the issue involved in Ground No. 2 relating to the dispute as regards the stage at which MAT credit is to be allowed, the ld. Representatives of both

CENTURY ENKA LIMITED.,PUNE vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 301/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year :2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 32(1)(iia)

section 234B and 234C of the Act. 2. Inter-connected grounds raised by assessee in ground No. 1 to 4 in this appeal is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer by sustaining the disallowance

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. IMC LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 781/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

section 234B is consequential in nature and will be levied under both normal & MAT computation of Income. However if the liability to pay the advance tax arises due to the amendment in the Act retrospectively, then there would be no interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act. In this connection we are putting our reliance in the case of Emami

M/S. IMC LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 813/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

section 234B is consequential in nature and will be levied under both normal & MAT computation of Income. However if the liability to pay the advance tax arises due to the amendment in the Act retrospectively, then there would be no interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act. In this connection we are putting our reliance in the case of Emami

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. I M C LTD, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 371/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

section 234B is consequential in nature and will be levied under both normal & MAT computation of Income. However if the liability to pay the advance tax arises due to the amendment in the Act retrospectively, then there would be no interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act. In this connection we are putting our reliance in the case of Emami

DIPAK KUMAR DEY,HOOGHLY vs. CIT, KOLKATA-9, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 768/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Section 143Section 234BSection 263Section 271Section 40Section 40A

section 143 (3) on a total income of Rs. 584,750/-, as a result of which an additional demand of Rs. 1,17,910/-was raised against the assessee which was inclusive of education cess and interest levied u/s 234B, 234C & 234D. In the assessment order the A.O. made an addition of Rs. 5427/- on account of unexplained closing balance

DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 9, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the ground nos. 8 & 9 in ITA No. 451/Kol/2013 raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1622/KOL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganeshita No. 1622/Kol/2011 A.Y 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri D.S Damle, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT, ld
Section 115JSection 143(3)

section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without first recording that he was not satisfied with the correctness of the claim as regards the claim that “no expenditure” was made by the assessee. Challenging the order of the tribunal, the present appeal has been filed. We have heard Mr.Bhowmik and are of the opinion that no point

DCIT, CIRCLE -6 KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 983/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Aug 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Hari Shankar Lal, CITFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, FCA
Section 115JSection 143(3)

section 234C of the Act for default in making payment of tax in advance which was physically impossible. 15. We, therefore, partly allow the appeal by answering the first question in the affirmative and against the assessee and the second and the third questions in the negative and against the revenue." Respectfully following the aforesaid decision, we dismiss the Ground

DCIT, CIRCLE -6 KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 674/KOL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Hari Shankar Lal, CITFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, FCA
Section 115JSection 143(3)

section 234C of the Act for default in making payment of tax in advance which was physically impossible. 15. We, therefore, partly allow the appeal by answering the first question in the affirmative and against the assessee and the second and the third questions in the negative and against the revenue." Respectfully following the aforesaid decision, we dismiss the Ground

DCIT, CIRCLE -6 KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 982/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Hari Shankar Lal, CITFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, FCA
Section 115JSection 143(3)

section 234C of the Act for default in making payment of tax in advance which was physically impossible. 15. We, therefore, partly allow the appeal by answering the first question in the affirmative and against the assessee and the second and the third questions in the negative and against the revenue." Respectfully following the aforesaid decision, we dismiss the Ground

MECLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 454/KOL/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: the due date of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act.

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

disallowance of Rs. 61,99,971/- u/s 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) of the I.T. Act for employees' contribution towards the provident fund beyond the due date prescribed in the Act, but paid before the due date of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act. 7. For that the Assessing Officer has erred

MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 458/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jun 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: the due date of filing of return under Section 139(1) of the Act.

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

disallowance of Rs. 61,99,971/- u/s 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) of the I.T. Act for employees' contribution towards the provident fund beyond the due date prescribed in the Act, but paid before the due date of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act. 7. For that the Assessing Officer has erred

ACIT, CC-2(1), KOL, KOLKATA vs. SHALIMAR HATCHERIES LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

ITA 546/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Appellant Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 3Rd Floor, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 -Vs.- Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,......................Respondent 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, 17Th Floor, Everest House, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] - A N D - C.O. No. 13/Kol/2023 (In I.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,..................Cross Objector 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 35(1)(ii)

disallowance of Rs.87,50,000/- under normal provisions for computing book profit and thereby erred in calculating the book profit at Rs.4,17,01,736/- as against returned book profit of Rs.3,29,51,736/-. (c) The ld. Assessing Officer has erred in charging interest under section 234C

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 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on disputed additions and levying interest of Rs. 1,90,68,525/-, Rs. 13,34,79,675/- and Rs. 3,04,32,052/-respectively on the assessee by the AO whereas the assessee had filed a return of loss for Rs. 3,62,82,050/- well within the extended time of filing

HARBAUER(INDIA) PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX ,CPC , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 512/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.512/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Harbauer (India) Pvt. Ltd.....................................................................…..…Appellant 16 Acropolis Mall, 1858 7Th Floor, Rajdanga Main Road, Kasba, Kolkata-700107. [Pan: Aabch3424M] Vs. Adit, Cpc...........................…..….............................................…....…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anuj Musaddi, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 23, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 08, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.09.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1(A). On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Erred In Upholding The Additions/ Disallowances Made By The Learned Adit-Cpc In The Order Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act'). 1(B). On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Erred In Not Providing Opportunity Of Personal Hearing/ Video Conferencing Before Upholding The Additions/ 1(B) Disallowances Made By The Learned Adit-Cpc In The Order Under Section

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

disallowance under section 80-IA of the Act merely on the basis of procedural error even after accepting the eligibility of the Assessee to claim deduction in its revised return of income. 3(a) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in upholding the addition of Rs.278