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.

1,233 results for “disallowance”+ Section 90clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,734Delhi3,701Chennai1,294Bangalore1,247Kolkata1,233Ahmedabad595Hyderabad551Jaipur395Pune316Surat309Indore260Chandigarh218Raipur127Cochin113Lucknow105Visakhapatnam103Amritsar96Rajkot93Nagpur76Karnataka69Cuttack65Allahabad54Calcutta46SC36Ranchi34Patna34Guwahati34Agra27Dehradun27Telangana22Jodhpur21Panaji20Varanasi15Jabalpur13A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Punjab & Haryana2Rajasthan1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Gauhati1Kerala1Andhra Pradesh1Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)67Section 14A66Section 14853Disallowance53Addition to Income52Section 25039Section 9038Section 143(1)37Deduction35Section 147

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

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1199/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Barun Kumar Ghosh & Shri Piyush Dey, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT(DR)
Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

90,099 Total Disallowance under section 14A = 90,099+ (1 % of Rs.45,30,38,502) = 90,099 + 45,30,385 = 46,20,484 The above

D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S TEENLOK ADVISORY SERVICES PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Showing 1–20 of 1,233 · Page 1 of 62

...
28
Section 26327
Depreciation14

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

ITA 1351/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

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

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

section 14A on account of expenditure incurred in relation to the exempt income at Rs.2,43,90,464/-. Accordingly, the difference of Rs.2,42,70,464/- (Rs.2,43,90,464/- minus Rs.1,20,000/-) was added by the Assessing Officer to the total income of the assessee. 4. The disallowance

VIVEK TIWARI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 3, SURI, SURI

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

ITA 163/KOL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

section 90 of the ITA, 1961 nor the DTAA provides that Foreign Tax Credit shall be disallowed for non-compliance

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

ITA 623/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 250

section 10 applies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance of expenditure debited in the profit and loss account as prepared under the Companies Act as neither any direct expenses nor any interest has been disallowed under Rule 8D of the IT Rules and the disallowance has been made only under clause (iii) of Rule

DCIT, CIR-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S THE JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2640/KOL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble Vice-, Kz & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Kolkata........................………..…..........Appellant Vs. M/S. The Jute Corporation Of India Ltd...................................................…………...................Respondent 15N, Hudco Building Nellie Sengupta Sarani Kolkata – 700 087 [Pan : Aabct 8820 B] Appearances By: Shri Biswajit Syam, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri T.P. Singh, Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 16Th, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 8Th, 2021 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-, Kz :- This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 5, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 26/08/2019, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’).

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194ISection 250Section 40

90,375/- made during the year under consideration which required disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Assessing Officer accordingly issued a notice u/s 148 of the Act to the assessee on 07/12/2012. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the following explanation was offered on behalf of the assessee in respect of the undisclosed closing stock of Rs.86

ITO, WD-7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S M.S.K. TRAVELS AND TOURS LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 284/KOL/2015[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jun 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri N.B.Som, Addl. CIT, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Bikash Chanda, AR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 5(2)Section 9Section 9(1)(i)Section 9(2)Section 90(1)

section 195, the expenditure of Rs 90,65,000 was to be disallowed under section 40(a)(i) of the Act. Aggrieved

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

90% of the actual\naddition made by the A.O on account of Repairs & Maintenance of Rs.\n51,95,305/-.\n3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)\nhas erred in deleting the addition of Rs.3,71,75,123/- made by the A.O on\naccount of disallowance computed u/s 14A r.w. Section

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

90% of the actual\naddition made by the A.O on account of Repairs & Maintenance of Rs.\n51,95,305/-.\n3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)\nhas erred in deleting the addition of Rs.3,71,75,123/- made by the A.O on\naccount of disallowance computed u/s 14A r.w. Section

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 1697/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2014-15
Section 115J

disallowed\nunder Rule 8D of the IT Rules and the disallowance has been made only\nunder clause (iii) of Rule 8D as per the formulae mentioned therein and\nthe same is not to be considered for the purpose of MAT and the\naddition, if any, made to the book profit on account of disallowance u/s\nPage 43\nITA

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 1696/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2013-14
Section 115J

section 10\napplies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance of expenditure\ndebited in the profit and loss account as prepared under the Companies\nAct as neither any direct expenses nor any interest has been disallowed\nunder Rule 8D of the IT Rules and the disallowance has been made only\nunder clause (iii) of Rule

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 622/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2011-12
Section 115J

section 10\napplies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance of expenditure\ndebited in the profit and loss account as prepared under the Companies\nAct as neither any direct expenses nor any interest has been disallowed\nunder Rule 8D of the IT Rules and the disallowance has been made only\nunder clause (iii) of Rule

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTINGS LIMITED., KOLKATA

ITA 192/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DR & Robin Choudhury, Addl.CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

90 CCH 81 (Delhi) wherein it was held, investments made by an assessee in the business of holding investments had to be excluded while computing disallowance under section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTINGS LIMITED., KOLKATA

ITA 191/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DR & Robin Choudhury, Addl.CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

90 CCH 81 (Delhi) wherein it was held, investments made by an assessee in the business of holding investments had to be excluded while computing disallowance under section

M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTING LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 138/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DR & Robin Choudhury, Addl.CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

90 CCH 81 (Delhi) wherein it was held, investments made by an assessee in the business of holding investments had to be excluded while computing disallowance under section

M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTING LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 139/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DR & Robin Choudhury, Addl.CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

90 CCH 81 (Delhi) wherein it was held, investments made by an assessee in the business of holding investments had to be excluded while computing disallowance under section

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

90% of the actual\naddition made by the A.O on account of Repairs & Maintenance of Rs.\n51,95,305/-.\n3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)\nhas erred in deleting the addition of Rs.3,71,75,123/- made by the A.O on\naccount of disallowance computed u/s 14A r.w. Section

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)

disallowable under section 40A(3) while a further sum of Rs.8,90,262/- was I.T.A. Nos. 402 & 631/KOL./2013 Assessment

ACIT, CIRCLE-5, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KESORAM INDUSTRIES. LTD, KOLKATA

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 1722/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2008-2009

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

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

Section 139(1) of the Act. It nowhere provides that once the assessee has filed a return of income within due date and such return includes a claim for deduction, then the quantum of deduction permissible as per law cannot be subsequently altered or modified. We find that for the AY 2008-09 the assessee had filed its return

KESORAM INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-5, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 1188/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

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

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

Section 139(1) of the Act. It nowhere provides that once the assessee has filed a return of income within due date and such return includes a claim for deduction, then the quantum of deduction permissible as per law cannot be subsequently altered or modified. We find that for the AY 2008-09 the assessee had filed its return

D.C.I.T CIR - 5,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KESORAM INDUSTRIES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 1995/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

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

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

Section 139(1) of the Act. It nowhere provides that once the assessee has filed a return of income within due date and such return includes a claim for deduction, then the quantum of deduction permissible as per law cannot be subsequently altered or modified. We find that for the AY 2008-09 the assessee had filed its return