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.

601 results for “disallowance”+ Section 10A(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai601Bangalore527Delhi494Chennai234Kolkata130Pune66Karnataka58Hyderabad58Ahmedabad54Jaipur39Visakhapatnam21Rajkot20Surat18Telangana13Cochin12Lucknow11Guwahati10Amritsar8Indore7Chandigarh6Jodhpur5Dehradun3Raipur3Nagpur2SC2Varanasi2Cuttack2Panaji1Ranchi1Calcutta1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 10A190Section 143(3)92Disallowance59Addition to Income56Deduction51Section 14A47Transfer Pricing27Section 271(1)(c)26Section 80I23Exemption

ASST CIT CIR 1, KALYAN vs. ASB INTERNATIONAL P. LTD, AMBERNATH

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 7034/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7034/Mum/2013 & 7035/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 & 2006-07) Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S Asb International बनाम/ Income Tax – Circle 1, Pvt. Ltd., V. Kalyan, E-9, Addl Ambernath Indl. 1St Floor,, Area, Mohan Plaza, Midc Anand Nagar, Wayale Nagar, Ambernath. Khadakpada, Kalyan. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan :Aaaca8424F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Girish Dave &For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Bora
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 32(2)Section 72

3) observed as follows: “Under the scheme of the Act, the profits of the unit eligible for deduction under Section 10A of the Act, would form part of the income computed under the head `Profits and gains of business and profession’. However, in order the same does not suffer tax, deduction will have to be made in respect thereof while

Showing 1–20 of 601 · Page 1 of 31

...
23
Section 10B21
Section 145A18

ITO 2(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. MOBIAPPS INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5211/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2008-09 Income Tax Officer-2(2)(4), M/S Mobiapps India Pvt. Ltd. Room No.542, 5Th Floor, 7/10, Borawala Building, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Horniman Circle, Fort, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400001 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaccm3613L

Section 10ASection 263

disallowance of profits in regard to domestic sales, the legislative intent in retaining Section 10A in Chapter III of the Act would clearly demonstrate the true nature of the said provision of the Act even after amendment thereof by the Finance Act of 2000. Deductions from the total income which is nowhere envisaged under the Act and the reference

PEOPLE INERACTIVE (I) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 7, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3558/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 10ASection 147Section 263

disallowance of profits in regard to domestic sales, the legislative intent in retaining Section 10A in Chapter III of the Act would clearly demonstrate the true nature of the said provision of the Act even after amendment thereof by the Finance Act of 2000. Deductions from the total income which is nowhere envisaged under the Act and the reference

PEOPLE INERACTIVE (I) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 7, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3717/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 10ASection 147Section 263

disallowance of profits in regard to domestic sales, the legislative intent in retaining Section 10A in Chapter III of the Act would clearly demonstrate the true nature of the said provision of the Act even after amendment thereof by the Finance Act of 2000. Deductions from the total income which is nowhere envisaged under the Act and the reference

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, , KALYAN vs. M/S ASB INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1541/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandip Singh Karhaildcit, C-1,Kalyan Vs. M/S. Asb International 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, Pvt. Ltd. Mayale Naar, E9, E44, Addl. Kalyan(W)- 421301 Ambernath, Industrial Area, Anand Nagar, Ambernath Thane-421506 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaaca8424F Appellant .. Respondent C.O. No. 65/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri. Paras SavlaFor Respondent: Shri. Ajay Chandra
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 250

disallowance only up to the first day of April, 2001, and granting the benefit, of those provisions even in respect of units to which sections 10A and 10B is applicable. The Finance Act, 2003, amended this sub- section with retrospective effect from April 1, 2001, by lifting the embargo in the aforesaid clauses in respect of depreciation and business loss

WNS GLOBAL SERVICES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 7377/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Dec 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri Amarjit Singhwns Global Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Gate No.4, Godrej & Boyce Income Tax- 10(2) Complex, Mumbai Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli (W) Mumbai – 400 079 Pan/Gir No.Aaacw2598L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 10ASection 10A(9)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

3. Without prejudice to ground no. 2 above, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, it is prayed that the learned AO be directed to allow deduction under Section 10A of the Act in respect of addition made to the income of Appellant Company on account of disallowance

AURO GOLD JEWELLERY P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 828/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Ms. Reepal TralshawalaFor Respondent: Shri S. Michael Jerald
Section 10ASection 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

disallowance out of deduction claimed under section 10A of the Act was on a presumptive/estimate basis. From the observations of learned Commissioner (Appeals), it is very much clear that the allegation of the Assessing Officer that no manufacturing activity was carried on by the assessee was found to be baseless as learned Commissioner (Appeals) has specifically stated that the assessee

INNO vs. OURCE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAIVS.DCIT, 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3424/MUM/2024[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2021-22 Innovsource Services Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, 14(1)(1), 501, Jolly Board Tower 1, I-Think Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Vs. Techno Campus Kanjurmarg-East, Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400042. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaeci 0979 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: 06/01/2025
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80J

10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA and section 80H to 80VV. The section 10B or section 10BA and section 80H to 80VV. The section 10B or section 10BA and section 80H to 80VV. The action of CPC restricting the deduction under section 80JJAAto action of CPC restricting the deduction under section 80JJAAto action of CPC restricting

LARSEN & TOUBRO INFOTECH LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 2(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1924/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Percy J PardiwallaFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat, CIT DR
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

Section 10A of the Act by Rs. 172,94,09,811/-. 3. Without prejudice to Ground no.2, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Officer, relying on the direction of DRP, erred in adopting the proportion of software development costs incurred outside India to quantify and disallow

BA CONTINUUM INDIA P.LTD ( SINCE MERGED WOTJ BA COTINUUM SOLUTIONS P. LTD ),MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 9(1)(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 2271/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2006-07 Ba Continuum India Private Ito, Ward 9(1)(2), Limited (Since Merged With Ba Room No. 226, Vs. Continuum Solutions Pvt. Ltd.), Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road, Building No. 5, K. Raheja Mind Mumbai-20. Space, Hitech City, Madhapur, Hyderabad-500081. Pan No. Aaccc 3062 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Nishant Thakkar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Salil Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 40

10A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act') on the standalone BA Continuum India Pvt. Ltd. 2 business profits of the year before adjustment of the business profits of the year before adjustment of the business profits of the year before adjustment of the brought forward business losses and unabsorbed brought forward business losses and unabsorbed brought forward business losses

ACCENTURE SERVICES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 7686/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwallaa/wFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 92C

3,05,66,130 pertains to STPI / SEZ unit eligible for deduction under section 10A of the Act. It is the contention of the assessee that once such amount is disallowed

ACIT - 8(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. SONATA SOFTWARE LTD., MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6463/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Circle-8(2)(2) Sonata Software Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.348, 3Rd Floor 208, T.V. Industrial Aayakar Bhawan, M.K Road Estate, S.K. Ahire Marg Vs. Mumbai 400 020 Worli, Mumbai 400 030 (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aabcs8459D याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By Shri Saurabh Rai यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee By Shri Vijay Mehta ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/03/2018 आदेश की तायीख /Date Of Order: 21/03/2018

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 40Section 9

3) on 22/10/2009 without making any adjustment. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings the AO noticed that the assessee has claimed deduction under section 10A at Rs.42,94,66,344/- in respect of five units. The further observed that the deduction under section 10A was disallowed

ACIT 8(1), MUMBAI vs. CELETRONIX INDIA P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross-objection filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5433/MUM/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.5433/Mum/2009 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2003-04) बनधम/ Celetronix India Pvt Ltd, Asstt. Commissioner Of Income C/O Jabil Circuit (I) Pvt.Ltd., Tax -8(1), Vs. Arena House, 3Rd Floor, Plot No.103, Room No.210, 2Nd Floor, Road No.12, Opp Tunga Paradise, Aayaker Bhavan, Marol, Midc, Andheri (E), M K Road, Mumbai-400093 Mumbai-400020 स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aaact7548K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. Cross-Objection No.81/Mum/2010 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.5433/Mum/2009 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2003-04) Celetronix India Pvt Ltd, बनधम/ Asstt.Commissioner Of Income Tax 8(1), Vs. Mumbai-400020 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Ms.Radha K NarangFor Respondent: S/Shri Sanjiv Shah, Shailesh
Section 10ASection 10A(9)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

3) of the Act at an amount of Rs.13,80,36,567/- by making various disallowances including rejection of claim u/s 10A of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee 4 CO No.81/M/2010 preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who deleted the addition made by the AO u/s 10A by observing as under

J.P MORGAN SERVICES INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 8(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 477/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09 J.P. Morgan Services India P. Dcit 8(2) Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम/ Prism Tower, Level No.9 To M.K. Rd Vs. 11, Link Rd, Mindspace, Mumbai-400020 Malad (W) Mumbai-400064 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aabcd0503B

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

disallowed by the Act [SEE: page 455 of "The Law and Practice of Income Tax" by Kanga and Palkhivala]. Therefore, schematic interpretation for making the formula in Section 80HHC workable cannot be ruled out. Similarly, purposeful interpretation of Section 80HHC which has undergone so many changes cannot be ruled out, particularly, when those legislative changes indicate that the legislature intended

CAPGEMINI INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO RG 10(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 7099/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri M P Lohia/For Respondent: Shri N K Chand
Section 144C(1)

disallowance and additions made under other corporate heads. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel Shri M P Lohia submitted that, so far as ground no. 1 is concerned, the same is general in nature and ground no. 2, 3, 4 and 9 are not pressed accordingly, these grounds are treated as dismissed being not pressed. Effective 2 Capgemini India

WNS GLOBAL SERVICES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 14(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2257/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiita No.2257/Mum/2017 Assessment Year : 2012 -13 Ita No.1955/Mum/2016 Assessment Year : 2011 -12

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka & Shri Manish KanthFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Sanjay & Smt. Kavita Kaushik
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 263Section 32(1)Section 92C

Section 10A of the "Act should be allowed, after setting off the 3 WNS Global Services Private Limited losses of certain STP/ SEZ units against the profits of the STP/ SEZ units of the Appellant. 7. The learned AO/Hon'ble DRP erred in disallowing

WNS GLOBAL SERVICES P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 14(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1955/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiita No.2257/Mum/2017 Assessment Year : 2012 -13 Ita No.1955/Mum/2016 Assessment Year : 2011 -12

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka & Shri Manish KanthFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Sanjay & Smt. Kavita Kaushik
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 263Section 32(1)Section 92C

Section 10A of the "Act should be allowed, after setting off the 3 WNS Global Services Private Limited losses of certain STP/ SEZ units against the profits of the STP/ SEZ units of the Appellant. 7. The learned AO/Hon'ble DRP erred in disallowing

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S THOMSON REUTERS INDIA SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by revenue in IT(TP)

ITA 843/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 10ASection 10A(2)Section 143(3)

10A of the Act for disallowance considered under section 40(a)(i) / 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 11. That the learned AO erred in consequently levying interest under section 234B of the Act. 12. That the learned AO erred levying interest under section 234D of the Act. 13. That the Appellant craves leave to add to and/or to alter

TATA SONS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT,CIR 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4221/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji a/wFor Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 92C

10A pertaining to computation of book M/s. Tata Sons Limited ITA No.4323/Mum./2017 and ITA No.4221/Mum./2017 profit under section 115JB of the Act. Since it is a legal issue and goes to the root of the matter and does not involve any verification of facts, therefore, the same is admitted for adjudication. It is the submission of the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. TATA SONS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4323/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji a/wFor Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 92C

10A pertaining to computation of book M/s. Tata Sons Limited ITA No.4323/Mum./2017 and ITA No.4221/Mum./2017 profit under section 115JB of the Act. Since it is a legal issue and goes to the root of the matter and does not involve any verification of facts, therefore, the same is admitted for adjudication. It is the submission of the assessee