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.

2,012 results for “disallowance”+ Section 36(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai7,671Delhi6,944Bangalore2,335Chennai2,246Kolkata2,012Ahmedabad1,801Pune1,334Jaipur1,170Hyderabad1,132Chandigarh767Indore659Surat449Cochin426Visakhapatnam401Amritsar316Raipur312Rajkot261Cuttack253Nagpur242Karnataka228Lucknow196Jodhpur140Guwahati132Agra127Ranchi100Telangana87Allahabad84Panaji73SC73Calcutta58Jabalpur57Patna48Kerala33Dehradun32Varanasi31Punjab & Haryana14Rajasthan7Himachal Pradesh5Orissa3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Andhra Pradesh1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Tripura1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Addition to Income70Section 143(3)62Section 14A58Disallowance55Section 43B42Section 36(1)(va)38Section 143(1)37Deduction32Section 25025Section 68

KATHLEEN CONFECTIONERS,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-32, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1187/KOL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jan 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri N. S. Saini, Advocate & Shri SonuFor Respondent: Shri Loviesh Shelley, JCIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowed u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was not justified in making adjustment u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act. Before proceeding further, it will be relevant to mention here that under section

Showing 1–20 of 2,012 · Page 1 of 101

...
17
Section 26316
Depreciation14

ALLAHABAD BANK,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal No

ITA 1803/KOL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2016AY 2003-04

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

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

section 36(1)(vii). 2. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that the debts written off by the non-rural branches of the bank are also to be adjusted against the provision allowed u/s. 36(1)(viia). 3. That the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowances

ALLAHABAD BANK,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal No

ITA 1802/KOL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2016AY 2003-04

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

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

section 36(1)(vii). 2. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that the debts written off by the non-rural branches of the bank are also to be adjusted against the provision allowed u/s. 36(1)(viia). 3. That the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowances

SINGHANIA & SONS (P) LTD,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 10(2), KOLKATA

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

ITA 412/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble Vice-, Kz) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Singhania & Sons Pvt. Ltd…………...............................................................………………….............Appellant 3D, Duckback House 41, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aadcs 6078 A] Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- Nfac...............................................………..…......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manoj Katarua, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Biswanath Das, Addl. Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

Section 14ASection 250

36(1)(va) of the Act and Rs. 30,68,583/- being employers' contribution under being employers' contribution under Section 43B of the Act. CIT(A) deleted the addition by holding that the assessee Section 43B of the Act. CIT(A) deleted the addition by holding that the assessee Section 43B of the Act. CIT(A) deleted the addition

M/S PREMIER IRRIGATION ADRITEC (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 387/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 2(24)Section 250Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance made 43B read with section u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act in respect of delay in deposit of Employees

SIDDHI VINAYAKA GRAPHICS PVT. ,KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, BENGALURU/ACIT, CIRCLE - 7(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 61/KOL/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 May 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A No.61/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt. Ltd.................................................……Appellant 58/5B, B.T. Road, Kolkata-700002 [Pan: Aakcs3206R] Vs. Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru/ Acit, Circle-7(2), Kolkata….…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri P. R. Kothari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 13, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 16, 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 30.11.2022 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’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “For That On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), Nfac Erred In Sustaining The Addition On Account Of Alleged Late Deposit Of Employee’S Contribution To Pf/Esi Etc. To The Extent Of Rs.792872/- Made By The Ld. Assessing Officer In Summary Assessment.”

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowed u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was not justified in making adjustment u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act. Before proceeding further, it will be relevant to mention here that under section

SIDDHI VINAYAKA GRAPHICS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, BENGALURU / I.T.O., CIRCLE - 7(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 143/KOL/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri P. R. Kothari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowed u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing 4 Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt. Ltd., AY: 2019-20 Officer was not justified in making adjustment u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act. Before proceeding further, it will be relevant to mention here that under section

DCIT, CIR. 5(1), KOLKATA vs. KARAM CHAND THAPAR & BROS COAL SALES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for AY 2015-16 is partly allowed and appeal for AY 2016-17 is dismissed

ITA 320/KOL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. Nos. 320 & 321/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,........Appellant Circle-5(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 -Vs.- Karam Chand Thapar & Bros. Coal Sales Limited,........................Respondent 25, Brabourne Road, Kolkata-700001 [Pan;Aabck1281H] Appearances By: Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Shri N.S. Saini, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 02, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 28, 2023 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act to only those payments made beyond the due date of filing

DCIT, CIR. 5(1), KOLKATA vs. KARAM CHAND THAPAR & BROS COAL SALES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for AY 2015-16 is partly allowed and appeal for AY 2016-17 is dismissed

ITA 321/KOL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. Nos. 320 & 321/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,........Appellant Circle-5(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 -Vs.- Karam Chand Thapar & Bros. Coal Sales Limited,........................Respondent 25, Brabourne Road, Kolkata-700001 [Pan;Aabck1281H] Appearances By: Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Shri N.S. Saini, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 02, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 28, 2023 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act to only those payments made beyond the due date of filing

DALMIA LAMINATORS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 7(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 106/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 250Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 68

disallowance made u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act in respect of delay in deposit of Employees’ Contribution of Provident Fund and Employees State Insurance (PF & ESI) totaling to Rs.13,04,162/-. The issue relating to ground taken by the assessee have come to rest by the recent verdict of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chekmate Services

AGARPARA JUTE MILLS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 47/KOL/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jul 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(x)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) is highly arbitrary, unjustified, unwarranted to the facts of the case and untenable in law. iii. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, action of ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,22,48,863/- be reversed and appellant be allowed the relief

AGARPARA JUTE MILLS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 46/KOL/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jul 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(x)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) is highly arbitrary, unjustified, unwarranted to the facts of the case and untenable in law. iii. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, action of ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,22,48,863/- be reversed and appellant be allowed the relief

BINAYAK IMAGINE & DIAGNOSTIC PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee ispartly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 519/KOL/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)

disallowance made u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act in respect of delayed deposit of Employees’ Contribution of Provident Fund and Employees State Insurance (PF & ESI) totaling to Rs.69,448/-. Since the issue raised in the grounds taken by the assessee has been adjudicated by the recent verdict of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chekmate Services

FRONTIER TEXTILES (P) LTD. ,HOWRAH vs. DCIT,CIR-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 710/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar& Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

disallowance of Rs. 2,13,086/- by the Ld. CIT(A) as made by the AO in respect of PF/ESI u/s 2(24)(x) read with Section 36(1

NAVEEN MERICO ENGINEERING CO. PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR. 12(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 424/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Bibekananda Madhu, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Disallowance of employees' contribution to EPF & ESI u/s 36(1)(va) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition u/s 36(v)(a) at Rs. 11,12,290/- on the basis of retrospective amendment, as per changes made in Finance Bill

M/S SHRISTI INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-11(2), KOLKATA

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

ITA 1228/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36(1)(va) to deposit the amounts retained by it or deducted by it from the employee's income, unless the condition that it is deposited on or before the due date, is correct and justified. The non-obstante clause has to be understood in the context of the entire provision of Section 43B which is to ensure timely payment

ALLAHABAD BANK,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 2175/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2016AY 2005-06

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

Section 115JSection 14A

disallowance of Rs.11,63,09,158/- made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) on account of deduction claimed by the assessee under section 36(1

NEW TEA CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 609/KOL/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Mar 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Sajnay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250(6)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

1) of the Act in respect of club expenses incurred by the assessee and disallowance of 2 New Tea Co. Ltd., AY: 2010-11 Rs.46,800/- in respect of delay in deposit of employees’ provident fund u/s. 2(24)(x) read with section 36

RADHASHYAM MANDAL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-27(1), HALDIA, HALDIA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 476/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(1)Section 2Section 2(24)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

disallowed then it could be allowable u/s. 37(1) of the Act which is the residual provision of the Act and provides that where any expenditure is wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business, the same is allowable for deduction. In support of his arguments he relied on the following Coordinate Bench decisions: a) Nirakar Security & Consultancy Services

KALIPADA SAHA,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WARD 24(3), HOOGHLY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1447/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg&Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 2Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(x)Section 3Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance made u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act in respect of delay in deposit of Employees’ Contribution of Provident Fund and Employees State Insurance (PF & ESI) totaling to Rs.18,22,874/-. Since the issue raised in the grounds taken by the assessee has been adjudicated by the recent verdict of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chekmate Services