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.

7 results for “disallowance”+ Section 36(1)(via)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai620Delhi533Chennai236Bangalore234Kolkata127Ahmedabad113Jaipur112Hyderabad82Chandigarh71Pune69Surat42Panaji35Indore30Cuttack27Cochin25Guwahati25Nagpur20Rajkot18Telangana16Amritsar15Jodhpur12Lucknow7Dehradun5SC5Visakhapatnam4Karnataka4Raipur4Calcutta3Varanasi3Allahabad2Ranchi1Rajasthan1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 115B18Section 143(3)8Section 2635Addition to Income4Section 253(3)3Section 1323Search & Seizure3Condonation of Delay3Section 133(6)2

RAJDHANI NAGAR SAHKARI BANK LTD,LUCKNOW vs. DY.CIT RANGE-6, LUCKNOW

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 142/LKW/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Apr 2025AY 2012-13
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(v)

disallowed the provision on account of his belief that\nprovision for NPA of loan accounts on contingency basis is not an allowable\ndeduction and the ld. CIT(A) had not decided the issue in his assessment order\npreferring rather to decide an issue that was not appeal before him i.e. the\ndisallowance on account of delay in deposit of employees

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, LUCKNOW vs. M/S. U.P. STATE CONSTRUCTION & INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, LUCKNOW

ITA 617/LKW/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Exemption2
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 251Section 263

1. That the Ld. A.O. wrongly objected the direction of the Ld. CIT Appeal for deleting the addition Rs. 4,95,42,049/- on account of interest of un-utilised funds on the face of finding by the Ld. CIT Appeal that the interest accrued on the advances received by the assesse from the govt. for construction activities

INCOME TAX OFFICER (E), LUCKNOW vs. ARCHISHA EDUCATIONAL TRUST, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 242/LKW/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow09 Feb 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A.D Jain & Shri T.S. Kapoora.Y. 2016-17 Archisha Educational Trust, Vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption), C-2024, Ii Floor, C Block, Lucknow Indira Nagar, Lucknow – 226016 Pan – Aaabt 9595K (Appellant) (Respondent) A.Y. 2016-17 Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Vs. Archisha Educational Trust, Lucknow C-2024, Ii Floor, C Block, Indira Nagar, Lucknow – 226016 Pan – Aaabt 9595K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 133(6)

disallowing the addition of the corpus donation from students/others persons amounting to Rs. 1,19,36,200/- as anonymous donation u/s 115BBC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. by the AO even when the plea taken by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings, that the students studying in the school are minors and belong to the poor family

ARCHISHA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,LUCKNOW vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, WARD, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 195/LKW/2020[20161-7]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow09 Feb 2021

Bench: Shri A.D Jain & Shri T.S. Kapoora.Y. 2016-17 Archisha Educational Trust, Vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption), C-2024, Ii Floor, C Block, Lucknow Indira Nagar, Lucknow – 226016 Pan – Aaabt 9595K (Appellant) (Respondent) A.Y. 2016-17 Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Vs. Archisha Educational Trust, Lucknow C-2024, Ii Floor, C Block, Indira Nagar, Lucknow – 226016 Pan – Aaabt 9595K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 133(6)

disallowing the addition of the corpus donation from students/others persons amounting to Rs. 1,19,36,200/- as anonymous donation u/s 115BBC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. by the AO even when the plea taken by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings, that the students studying in the school are minors and belong to the poor family

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 351/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

36,29,103/- against the consideration of Rs. 30,00,000/-. Therefore difference between FMV of property and actual sale consideration is of Rs. 6,29,103/- only. However, Ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition to the extent of Rs. 47,38,700/- being difference between FMV estimated by VO at Rs. 77,38,700/- (-) Rs. 30,00,000/-. Therefore

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY, GONDA U.P.

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 460/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

36,29,103/- against the consideration of Rs. 30,00,000/-. Therefore difference between FMV of property and actual sale consideration is of Rs. 6,29,103/- only. However, Ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition to the extent of Rs. 47,38,700/- being difference between FMV estimated by VO at Rs. 77,38,700/- (-) Rs. 30,00,000/-. Therefore

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 349/LKW/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

36,29,103/- against the consideration of Rs. 30,00,000/-. Therefore difference between FMV of property and actual sale consideration is of Rs. 6,29,103/- only. However, Ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition to the extent of Rs. 47,38,700/- being difference between FMV estimated by VO at Rs. 77,38,700/- (-) Rs. 30,00,000/-. Therefore