Search: disallowance | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

1,231 results for “disallowance”+ Section 40A(2)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,231 Delhi1,158 Bangalore466 Chennai461 Kolkata447 Ahmedabad199 Hyderabad154 Pune150 Jaipur142 Raipur128 Indore83 Surat82 Chandigarh69 Amritsar68 Nagpur43 Visakhapatnam41 Cuttack34 Lucknow32 Cochin27 Jodhpur23 Rajkot23 Allahabad23 Agra21 Karnataka20 Guwahati13 SC10 Patna9 Varanasi7 Dehradun7 Calcutta5 Ranchi4 Telangana3 Panaji2 Punjab & Haryana2 Kerala2 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)77 Disallowance68 Addition to Income62 Section 26335 Section 4033 Section 40A(2)(b)30 Deduction25 Section 143(1)21 Section 6821 Section 40A(2)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BLEND FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the R

ITA 8088/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant (Account Member) & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhari (SR. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40A(2)(b)

disallowance of Rs. 1,62,10,571/- under section 40A(2)(b) is not justified under section 40A(2)(b

DENTSU AEGIS NETWORK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED(ERSTWHILE VIZEUM MEDIA SERVICE INDIA MERGED IN DAN INDIA),MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE 8(3)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Showing 1–20 of 1,231 · Page 1 of 62

...

20

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6122/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokardentsu Aegis Network Dcit Central India Private Limited Circle-1(1), (Erstwhile Vizeum Media Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Service India Merged Maharashi Karve With Dentsu Aegis Marg, Mumbai-400 Network India Private 020 Limited W.E.F. 1St April 2017) 2Nd Floor, Devchand House, Dr. A. B. Road, Shiv Sagar Estate Mumbai, Worli So, Mumbai-400 018 Pan/Gir No. Aahca3058N (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ketan Ved & Shri Abdul Kadir Jawadwala, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 20.02.2026

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

disallowances under section 40(a)(ia) and under section 37(1) read with section 40A(2)(b). The CIT(A) confirmed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MUMBAI vs. QUANTUM ADVISORS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 2438/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Dcit-1(3)(1), M/S Quantum Advisors Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 535, 5Th Floor, 503, Regent Chambers, Nariman Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Point, Mumbai-400021. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacq 0281 C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Niraj SethFor Respondent: Mr. Rajendra Chandekar, DR

section 40A(2)(b) is to disallow an expenditure which is envisaged by section 40A(2)(b) is to disallow

ACIT- 3(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. MM/S SANOFI INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD)., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1302/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 271(1)(c)

disallowance of the expenditure of Rs. 13,91,89,365 under section 40A(2)(a)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter

M/S SANOFI INDIA LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT RG 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1606/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 271(1)(c)

disallowance of the expenditure of Rs. 13,91,89,365 under section 40A(2)(a)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter

GRAMEEN IMPACT INVESTMENT INDIA PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL -E ASSESSMENT CENTRE , DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2375/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Grameen Impact Investments India National-E-Assessment Pvt. Ltd., Centre, 306, 3Rd Floor, A Wing, Devroop Vs. New Delhi-110 001. Building, 36, Turner Road, Bandra West, Mumbai-400050. Pan No. Aaacr 9005 R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. K. Shivaram & Mr. Shashi Bekal, Ars : Revenue By Mr. Satyapal Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/12/2022 Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 Grameen Impact Investments India Dy. Cit-13(3)(1), Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 229, Aayakar 306, 3Rd Floor, A Wing, Devroop Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Building, 36, Turner Road, Bandra Mumbai-400050. West, Mumbai-400050. Pan No. Aaacr 9005 R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. K. Shivaram & Mr. Shashi

Disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) of the Act of ce under section 40A(2)(b) of the Act of the Act That

MEHTA BROTHERS EXPORTS,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 16(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 5753/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5753/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04) Mehta Brothers Exports, The Asstt.Commissioner Of बनाम/ C/O Natvarlal Vepari & Co., Income Tax -16(3), V. Chartered Accountants, 2 Nd Floor, Oricon House, 4Th Floor, Matru Mandir, 12, K. Dubash Marg, Tardeo Marg, Fort, Mumbai – 400 007. Mumbai – 400 013. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafm2744B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sumen Kumar, DR

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 46A

disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) of the I.T. Act. 13. In this view of the matter, we direct : (i)the assessee

ASST CIT 19(3), MUMBAI vs. PAHILAJRAI JAIKISHIN, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1562/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1562/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

Section 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 40

40A and 43B deal with Business Disallowances. Keeping in mind the said scheme the position is that sections 30 to 38 are deductions which are limited by section 40. Therefore, even if an assessee is entitled to deduction under section 36(1)(iii), the assessee (firm) will not be entitled to claim deduction for interest payment exceeding 18/12 per cent

PAHILAJRAI JAIKISHAN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 994/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1562/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

Section 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 40

40A and 43B deal with Business Disallowances. Keeping in mind the said scheme the position is that sections 30 to 38 are deductions which are limited by section 40. Therefore, even if an assessee is entitled to deduction under section 36(1)(iii), the assessee (firm) will not be entitled to claim deduction for interest payment exceeding 18/12 per cent

ADDL CIT 8(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SANOFI INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. AVENTIS PHARMA LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the C.O. of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is partly allowed

ITA 6698/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (CIT-DR) &

Section 32Section 32(1)

disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) is not sustainable. The CIT(A) however upheld the disallowance by placing reliance on the decision

SANOFI INDIA LTD FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD ,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the C.O. of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is partly allowed

ITA 6626/MUM/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (CIT-DR) &

Section 32Section 32(1)

disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) is not sustainable. The CIT(A) however upheld the disallowance by placing reliance on the decision

ADDL CIT RG 8(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SANOFI INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. AVENTIS PHARMA LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the C.O. of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is partly allowed

ITA 7712/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (CIT-DR) &

Section 32Section 32(1)

disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) is not sustainable. The CIT(A) however upheld the disallowance by placing reliance on the decision

M/S ARENA ENTERPRISES ,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 41(4)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for stati...

ITA 6321/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Mr. Surendra Mohan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Mrugakshi Joshi

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)

disallowed the excess interest payment @ 3% to the related parties invoking section 40A(2)(b) of payment @ 3% to the related

M/S ARENA ENTERPRISES,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD, 41(4)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for stati...

ITA 6322/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Mr. Surendra Mohan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Mrugakshi Joshi

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)

disallowed the excess interest payment @ 3% to the related parties invoking section 40A(2)(b) of payment @ 3% to the related

M.R. CONSTRUCTION,.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 3710/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

b) 2. Disallowances under section 40A(3) 4,97,915 to the extent of 20% in case of Expenditure of Rs. 2

M.R. CONSTRUCTION,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 22,

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 3709/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

b) 2. Disallowances under section 40A(3) 4,97,915 to the extent of 20% in case of Expenditure of Rs. 2

ASST CIT CC-22, MUMBAI vs. JAWAHAR PUROHIT, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 6847/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

b) 2. Disallowances under section 40A(3) 4,97,915 to the extent of 20% in case of Expenditure of Rs. 2

DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 3645/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

b) 2. Disallowances under section 40A(3) 4,97,915 to the extent of 20% in case of Expenditure of Rs. 2

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7209/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

b) 2. Disallowances under section 40A(3) 4,97,915 to the extent of 20% in case of Expenditure of Rs. 2

ACIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 1144/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

b) 2. Disallowances under section 40A(3) 4,97,915 to the extent of 20% in case of Expenditure of Rs. 2