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.

2,221 results for “disallowance”+ Section 40clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai7,609Delhi6,536Chennai2,422Bangalore2,324Kolkata2,221Ahmedabad1,673Pune1,156Hyderabad1,088Jaipur992Indore597Chandigarh543Surat503Visakhapatnam383Cochin382Raipur308Cuttack298Rajkot281Nagpur266Karnataka240Amritsar237Lucknow155Guwahati122Ranchi100Allahabad97Panaji95Telangana68Patna68Agra67Calcutta65Jodhpur63SC57Dehradun53Jabalpur46Kerala30Varanasi28Punjab & Haryana5Orissa5Rajasthan4Gauhati2J&K1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1Himachal Pradesh1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Tripura1Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 4073Addition to Income60Disallowance59Section 143(3)53Deduction47Section 14A39Section 25033Section 115J32Section 143(1)24Section 143(2)

M/S. FUTURE DISTRIBUTORS,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 9, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 277/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2016AY 2010-2011

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

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 263Section 40

disallowed under section 40(a)(ia). Since no such disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was made by the Assessing

SOMA RANI GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-49, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 2,221 · Page 1 of 112

...
22
TDS21
Section 8017
ITA 1420/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Sept 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) does not arise. Even though it was stated in sub-section 7 that person

SHREE ASHOKE PRASAD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-49, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 611/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 582/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Acit, Circle-49(1), Kolkata -Vs- Ashoke Prasad. [Pan: Afqpp 6505 C] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 611/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ashoke Prasad -Vs- Dcit, Circle-49, Kolkata [Pan: Afqpp 6505 C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Robin Chowdhury, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(4)Section 201(1)Section 40

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia)of the Act, in our opinion there is violation of section 194C(7) and disallowance

ACIT, CIRCLE-49(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ASHOKE PRASAD, KOLKATA

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

ITA 582/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 582/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Acit, Circle-49(1), Kolkata -Vs- Ashoke Prasad. [Pan: Afqpp 6505 C] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 611/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ashoke Prasad -Vs- Dcit, Circle-49, Kolkata [Pan: Afqpp 6505 C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Robin Chowdhury, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(4)Section 201(1)Section 40

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia)of the Act, in our opinion there is violation of section 194C(7) and disallowance

M/S GHOSH & CHAKRABORTY TRANSPORT,BURDWAN vs. THE ITO, WD-2(1), ASANSOL, ASANSOL

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

ITA 423/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

Section 194CSection 40

section 40(a)(ia). 4. The disallowance of Rs.29,38,990/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 40(a)(ia) was challenged

ITO, WARD-45(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ASHOK TRADING COMPANY, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 650/KOL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shrin.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07

Section 143(3)(II)Section 194CSection 40Section 68

disallowed by the AO for non-deduction of TDS in terms of section 194C read with section to 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The details

M/S INDUSTRIAL PERFORATION INDIA (P) LTD,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O. WD - 5(4),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 413/KOL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 May 2016AY 2005-06

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

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.M Das, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 194JSection 200Section 234BSection 40

Section 40 (a)(ia) of the Act and also sought to explain the rationale behind its insertion. In particular, the Court would like to refer to para 9 of the said order which reads as under: "On a conceptual note, primary justification for such a disallowance

M/S POWER MAX (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-8, KOL., KOLKATA

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

ITA 125/KOL/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jun 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 125/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Power Max (India) Pvt. Ltd....................................………………………….............Appellant 18A, Park Street, Stephen Court, Kolkata – 700 071. [Pan : Aabcp 9559 R] Dcit Circle 8 Kolkata..………………………………………………………….............Respondent Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 6Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 107. Appearances By: Shri A.N. Chatterjee, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit (Dr) Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 05, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 15, 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – 18, Kolkata Dated 19.12.2016. 2. At The Time Of Hearing Before The Tribunal, The Learned Counsel For The Assessee Has Not Pressed Ground No 1 Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee. It Is Also Noted That Ground No 4 Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal In General Which Does Not Call For Specific Adjudication.

Section 143(3)Section 194C(2)Section 194ISection 206ASection 40

disallowed the said amount also under section 40(a)(ia). Thus a total disallowance of Rs. 1,16,51,016/- was made

TAPAS KUMAR SARKAR,BARASAT, NORTH TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. I.T.O., WARD - 50(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1872/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Oct 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 194Section 194CSection 194JSection 250Section 40

Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia): The learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance of ₹50,05,666 and 26,24,969 under

TAPAS KUMAR SARKAR,BARASAT, NORTH TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. I.T.O., WARD - 50(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1873/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Oct 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 194Section 194CSection 194JSection 250Section 40

Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia): The learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance of ₹50,05,666 and 26,24,969 under

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

40(a)(i) and disallowed the payment of Rs.1.35 crores made by the assessee to M/s. RBESL-UK towards expatriate fees. 6. The disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section

ORIENT PAPER & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. J.C.I.T RANGE - 6,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal in ITA 430/Kol/2013 of assessee is partly allowed and appeal in ITA 648/Kol/2013 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 430/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Asim Chaudhury, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

disallowing under section 40 (a)(ia) of the Act, the sum of Rs.14,61,956/- being the installment of lease

TAPAN KUMAR DUTTA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 2(4), ASANSOL

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

ITA 472/KOL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 40

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia)of the Act, in our opinion there is violation of section 194C(7) and disallowance

M/S. B.S. ENGINEERING ENTERPRISE,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 97/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

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

Section 194HSection 40

40(a)(ia) of the Act. I, therefore, submit that the disallowance of Rs.8,95,000/- was wholly unjustified and unwarranted in this case”. 4. The ld. CIT(Appeals) did not find merit in the submissions made by the assessee and rejecting the same, he proceeded to confirm the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section

ACIT, CIRCLE - 52, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SUBHOTOSH MAJUMDAR, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 366/KOL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri S. Srivastava, CITFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 5Section 9Section 9(1)(i)

disallowance made by AO in respect to expenses claimed by the assessee of fee for technical services for non-deduction of TDS u/s. 195 of the Act thereby invoking the provisions of section 40

ACIT, CIRCLE - 52, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SUBHOTOSH MAJUMDER, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 2058/KOL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Nov 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri S. Srivastava, CITFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 5Section 9Section 9(1)(i)

disallowance made by AO in respect to expenses claimed by the assessee of fee for technical services for non-deduction of TDS u/s. 195 of the Act thereby invoking the provisions of section 40

DCIT,CIRCLE-52, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRI SUBHOTOSH MAJUMDER . S. JAMUMBDER &CO,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1629/KOL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri S. Srivastava, CITFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 5Section 9Section 9(1)(i)

disallowance made by AO in respect to expenses claimed by the assessee of fee for technical services for non-deduction of TDS u/s. 195 of the Act thereby invoking the provisions of section 40

DEBJYOTI MISHRA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-22(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1411/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D.Shah, ld.ARFor Respondent: Md. Ghyas Uddin, JCIT, ld.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 234ASection 40

disallowance towards instrument hire charges for violation of the provisions contemplated under section 194C and made addition by invoking the section 40

SRI AMIT KUMAR SEN,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 51,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 402/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Apr 2016AY 2008-2009

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

Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(3)

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) and another by way of disallowance under section 40A(3). It is, however, observed

I.T.O WD - 8(3),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RUIA SONS PVT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 365/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm] I.T.A No. 365/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10 I.T.O., Ward-8(3), -Vs.- M/S. Ruia Sons Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaccr 3949 Q] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, Cit For The Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate

For Appellant: Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, CITFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194JSection 301Section 40

disallowance can be made u/s 40(10(ia) of the Act. That in effect the Tribunal analyzing the section 40