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.

473 results for “disallowance”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai15,338 Delhi11,450 Chennai5,168 Bangalore4,918 Kolkata4,451 Ahmedabad3,164 Pune3,148 Hyderabad2,028 Jaipur1,670 Cochin1,400 Chandigarh1,067 Indore961 Surat822 Visakhapatnam717 Raipur589 Karnataka574 Cuttack558 Rajkot511 Nagpur473 Amritsar451 Lucknow353 Panaji293 Jodhpur216 Agra208 Ranchi177 Guwahati175 Telangana168 SC123 Dehradun123 Patna116 Jabalpur100 Calcutta92 Allahabad91 Kerala68 Varanasi51 Punjab & Haryana30 Orissa11 Rajasthan7 Himachal Pradesh7 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN5 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 Gauhati1 J&K1 Tripura1 Uttarakhand1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)72 Addition to Income62 Deduction61 Disallowance60 Section 80P59 Section 80P(2)(a)47 Section 143(1)45 Section 26342 Section 143(1)(a)39 Section 40

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the A

ITA 391/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur27 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Agrawal

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

disallowed, it would ultimately result in increase in gross total income, which is completely deductible under section 80P. Thus, the deduction

Showing 1–20 of 473 · Page 1 of 24

...

34

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHANDRAPUR CIRCLE , CHANDRAPUR vs. M/S CHANDRAPUR DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPRATIVE BANK LIMTED , CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 241/NAG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowance of deduction under section 36(1)(vii) of the Act and allowed deduction of ` 5,32,982, as against

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRAVATI & CHANDRAPUR CIRCLE, AMRAVATI vs. CHANDRAPUR DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD., CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 89/NAG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowance of deduction under section 36(1)(vii) of the Act and allowed deduction of ` 5,32,982, as against

ACIT, CHANDRAPUR CIRCLE , CHANDRAPUR vs. CHANDRAPUR DISTT. CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD , CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 399/NAG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowance of deduction under section 36(1)(vii) of the Act and allowed deduction of ` 5,32,982, as against

ASHOKKUMAR GOKULCHAND SANANDA,BULDHANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA

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

ITA 427/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Royashokkumar Gokulchand Acit, Akola Circle, Akola Sananda, Rana Traders, Vs Gandhi Chowk, Khamgaon, Dist. Buldhan, Khamgaon Pan : Adpps 755I L Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri K.P. Dewani, Adv Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 234BSection 250Section 35(1)(ii)

disallowance claimed on deduction u/s 35(1)(ii) of I.T. Act 1961. Disallowance made by A.O. is not in accordance

ACIT, AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMRAVATI vs. CHANDRAPUR DIST CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 398/NAG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Salonkhe

Section 271(1)(c)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

deduction u/s.36(1)(viia) made by assessee was disallowed in the assessment orders and such disallowance was confirmed in the appellate

SANJAY SHANKARRAO JADHAO,AMRAVATI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 198/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 143(3)Section 250

disallowing the deduction of the profit under section 80IA(5) of the Act without deducting the losses of the earlier

VIDHARBHA KONKAN GRAMIN BANK ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(5) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 8/NAG/2019[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 22Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 80P

deduction should be based on gross provision made and not the net provision made. Reliance is placed on decision of Hon'ble ITAT Cochin in the case of Kannur District Cooperative Bank (136 ITD 102). 3. The Ld.CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance

VIDHARBHA KONKAN GRAMIN BANK ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(5) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 7/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 22Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 80P

deduction should be based on gross provision made and not the net provision made. Reliance is placed on decision of Hon'ble ITAT Cochin in the case of Kannur District Cooperative Bank (136 ITD 102). 3. The Ld.CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance

SHRI GO0VINDDAS GOVARDHANDAS DAGA,NAGPUR vs. A.C.I.T. CIRCLE 2, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for A

ITA 601/NAG/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(ii)

disallowing deduction claimed u/s 35(1)(ii) of Income Tax Act 1961 is unjustified, unwarranted and bad in law. 2) The learned

DY. C.I.T. CIR-.2, NAGPUR vs. SHRI GOVINDDAS GOVERDHAN DAGA, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for A

ITA 614/NAG/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(ii)

disallowing deduction claimed u/s 35(1)(ii) of Income Tax Act 1961 is unjustified, unwarranted and bad in law. 2) The learned

DURGAPUR RAYATWARI COLLIERY KAMGAR SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD-2, CHANDRAPUR

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

ITA 212/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Ms. Alfiya RozieFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)

Disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act (b) Levy of Interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act 6. Disallowance

DURGAPUR RAYATWARI COLLIERY KAMGAR SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD 2, CHANDRAPUR

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

ITA 211/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Ms. Alfiya RozieFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)

Disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act (b) Levy of Interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act 6. Disallowance

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU A. SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 511/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

deduction at 25% of the profit of the eligible business. The AO has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s.80IB of the Act because

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU A. SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 512/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

deduction at 25% of the profit of the eligible business. The AO has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s.80IB of the Act because

SMT. ANJU SARAF,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 498/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

deduction at 25% of the profit of the eligible business. The AO has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s.80IB of the Act because

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 438/NAG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

deduction at 25% of the profit of the eligible business. The AO has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s.80IB of the Act because

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 436/NAG/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

deduction at 25% of the profit of the eligible business. The AO has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s.80IB of the Act because

SMT. ANJU SARAF,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 499/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

deduction at 25% of the profit of the eligible business. The AO has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s.80IB of the Act because

BHAGYASHRI NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,CHANDRAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 377/NAG/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y Marathe, Sr.DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80P

deduction disallowance made in assessee’s hands. This is for the precise reason that legislature has introduced such a disallowance