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.

8,577 results for “disallowance”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai8,577Delhi5,779Chennai3,121Kolkata2,343Bangalore2,326Ahmedabad1,020Pune827Hyderabad602Jaipur582Cochin314Indore308Chandigarh287Karnataka267Raipur235Lucknow222Surat194Nagpur176Visakhapatnam166Rajkot143Amritsar100Cuttack83Calcutta77Guwahati69Jodhpur65SC61Telangana54Agra46Panaji46Ranchi43Patna32Dehradun31Kerala24Allahabad21Jabalpur17Varanasi15Punjab & Haryana8Orissa8Rajasthan7Himachal Pradesh5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Gauhati2ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Section 14A154Disallowance61Section 143(3)54Addition to Income53Section 115J36Section 26331Deduction30Section 1129Exemption21Section 80P(2)(d)

ELARA CAPITAL (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT- CIRCLE 6(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1569/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Elara Capital (India) Pvt. Ltd., The Acit-Circle 6(2)(2), Tower 3, 21St Floor, One Room No. 506, 5Th Floor, Vs. International Center, Senapati Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Karve Road, Mumbai- Road (West), Mumbai-400013. 400020. Pan No. Aabce 6487 B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Milind DattaniFor Respondent: Mr. P.D. Chogule (Addl. CIT)
Section 14A

exempt income have to be considered for disallowance irrespective exempt income have to be considered for disallowance irrespective exempt income

ASIA INVESTMENTS PVT.. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT ,CIRCLE 2 (1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeal

Showing 1–20 of 8,577 · Page 1 of 429

...
20
Section 14718
Section 12A17
ITA 6209/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Respondent: Mr. Kalpesh Unadkat &
Section 14A

exempt income and disallowing the directly incurred for earning exempt income and disallowing the directly incurred for earning exempt income

THE DDIT (I.T)1(1) vs. M/S. ABUDABI COMMERCIAL BANK LTD.,

In the result, all the appeals and cross objections are disposed

ITA 2205/MUM/2004[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2023AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1997-98 & Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 Dy. Dit(It)-1(1), M/S Abu Dhabi Commercial Room No. 117, Scindia House, Bank Ltd., N.M. Road, Ballard Pier, Vs. 75-B, Rehmant Manzil Veer Mumbai-400001. Nariman Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaca 4216 B Appellant Respondent Co No. 115/Mum/2004 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 2205/Mum/2004) Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Co No. 414/Mum/2004 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3925/Mum/2004)

Section 10(15)

exempted income u/s case of the assessee disallowance of 1% of the exempt case of the assessee disallowance of 1% of the exempt

M/S. ABU-DHABI COMMERCIAL BANK LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DDIT (IT)-1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals and cross objections are disposed

ITA 6530/MUM/2006[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1997-98 & Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 Dy. Dit(It)-1(1), M/S Abu Dhabi Commercial Room No. 117, Scindia House, Bank Ltd., N.M. Road, Ballard Pier, Vs. 75-B, Rehmant Manzil Veer Mumbai-400001. Nariman Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaca 4216 B Appellant Respondent Co No. 115/Mum/2004 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 2205/Mum/2004) Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Co No. 414/Mum/2004 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3925/Mum/2004)

Section 10(15)

exempted income u/s case of the assessee disallowance of 1% of the exempt case of the assessee disallowance of 1% of the exempt

ABU DHABI COMMERICAL BANK LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADIT (IT) 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals and cross objections are disposed

ITA 3463/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1997-98 & Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 Dy. Dit(It)-1(1), M/S Abu Dhabi Commercial Room No. 117, Scindia House, Bank Ltd., N.M. Road, Ballard Pier, Vs. 75-B, Rehmant Manzil Veer Mumbai-400001. Nariman Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaca 4216 B Appellant Respondent Co No. 115/Mum/2004 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 2205/Mum/2004) Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Co No. 414/Mum/2004 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3925/Mum/2004)

Section 10(15)

exempted income u/s case of the assessee disallowance of 1% of the exempt case of the assessee disallowance of 1% of the exempt

JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE-27, MUMBAI vs. ABU-DHABI COMMERCIAL BANK LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals and cross objections are disposed

ITA 1733/MUM/2001[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2023AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1997-98 & Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 Dy. Dit(It)-1(1), M/S Abu Dhabi Commercial Room No. 117, Scindia House, Bank Ltd., N.M. Road, Ballard Pier, Vs. 75-B, Rehmant Manzil Veer Mumbai-400001. Nariman Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaca 4216 B Appellant Respondent Co No. 115/Mum/2004 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 2205/Mum/2004) Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Co No. 414/Mum/2004 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3925/Mum/2004)

Section 10(15)

exempted income u/s case of the assessee disallowance of 1% of the exempt case of the assessee disallowance of 1% of the exempt

ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI vs. HDFC LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3785/MUM/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and Shri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 1

disallowance be restricted to exempt income earned during the year, since disallowance otherwise so computed exceeds, the exempt income earned

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5033/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and Shri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 1

disallowance be restricted to exempt income earned during the year, since disallowance otherwise so computed exceeds, the exempt income earned

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4313/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and Shri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 1

disallowance be restricted to exempt income earned during the year, since disallowance otherwise so computed exceeds, the exempt income earned

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2867/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and Shri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 1

disallowance be restricted to exempt income earned during the year, since disallowance otherwise so computed exceeds, the exempt income earned

DCIT- 8(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. PIRAMAL ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

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

ITA 2015/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi/Priyank Gandhi/MsFor Respondent: Shri N. V. Nadkarni, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 24Section 250

disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act. I. Facts: The details of exempt income earned and suo-moto disallowance made by the respondent

DCIT - 9(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. AMARTARA PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

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

ITA 6050/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 45(3)Section 50C

disallowed expenditure incurred in relation to earn exempt income and hence, issued a show cause notice and asked as to why disallowance

AMARTARA PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 9(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6114/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 45(3)Section 50C

disallowed expenditure incurred in relation to earn exempt income and hence, issued a show cause notice and asked as to why disallowance

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1682/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar
Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

disallowance for the exempt income cannot exceed 28% of the disallowance for the exempt income cannot exceed 28% of the disallowance

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1681/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar
Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

disallowance for the exempt income cannot exceed 28% of the disallowance for the exempt income cannot exceed 28% of the disallowance

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1679/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar
Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

disallowance for the exempt income cannot exceed 28% of the disallowance for the exempt income cannot exceed 28% of the disallowance

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1680/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar
Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

disallowance for the exempt income cannot exceed 28% of the disallowance for the exempt income cannot exceed 28% of the disallowance

M/S EDELWISS RURAL & CORPORATE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2471/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S Edelweiss Rural & Acit Central Circle-1(2), Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd., R. No. 906, 9Th Floor, Old Vs. Edelweiss House, Off Cst Road, Cgo Building Annexe, Kalina, Santacruz (East), Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400098. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aakcs 7311 R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Jitendra Jain, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Sanjeev Kashyap, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 09/03/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement ___/03/2023 Order

For Appellant: Mr. Jitendra Jain, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Sanjeev Kashyap, CIT-DR

disallows certain expenditure incurred to earn exempt disallows certain expenditure incurred to earn exempt disallows certain expenditure incurred to earn

DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI vs. ICICI BANK LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal and assessee’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5276/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri B. Pruseth
Section 10Section 14A

disallowed interest expenditure of ` 224,82,91,904, relatable to exempt income. Thus, in effect, assessee claimed exemption under section

ACIT, MUMBAI vs. K RAHEJA CORP PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6083/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2020-21

For Respondent: Mr. Paresh Sondagar, CA
Section 11SSection 14A

disallowance must be restricted upto the exempt income earned during of disallowance must be restricted upto the exempt income earned