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.

428 results for “disallowance”+ Section 11(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai15,315 Delhi12,624 Bangalore4,475 Chennai4,319 Kolkata3,791 Ahmedabad3,130 Pune2,971 Hyderabad2,017 Jaipur1,789 Chandigarh1,119 Surat1,096 Indore1,006 Cochin774 Raipur678 Visakhapatnam660 Cuttack559 Karnataka531 Rajkot520 Amritsar472 Nagpur428 Lucknow358 Agra220 Panaji215 Jodhpur200 Guwahati174 Ranchi160 Telangana137 Allahabad128 SC113 Patna112 Dehradun95 Calcutta79 Jabalpur60 Varanasi47 Kerala43 Punjab & Haryana21 Rajasthan11 Orissa9 Himachal Pradesh7 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN5 Gauhati2 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1 Andhra Pradesh1 Tripura1 Uttarakhand1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)73 Addition to Income73 Disallowance61 Section 26352 Section 153A45 Deduction42 Section 80I40 Section 80P(2)(a)38 Section 143(1)31 Section 11

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 336/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 69A

section 11(6) of the Act disallowed depreciation by holding that the assessee trust had already claimed the purchase of asset

Showing 1–20 of 428 · Page 1 of 22

...

25

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 335/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 69A

section 11(6) of the Act disallowed depreciation by holding that the assessee trust had already claimed the purchase of asset

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2 (1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 337/NAG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 69A

section 11(6) of the Act disallowed depreciation by holding that the assessee trust had already claimed the purchase of asset

ITO WARD-1(1) NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. ASHWAMI SALES AND MARKETING PVT.LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 294/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh P. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 143(1)Section 194(7)Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

11. The expressions ―Any person responsible for paying any sum‖ and ―to any resident (hereafter in this section referred to as the contractor)‖, used in this section plainly makes it clear that the receiver of the payment is the contractor, and the person making such payment is the contractee. It goes without saying that the person who in pursuance

LOKMANYA TILAD JANAKALYA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 384/NAG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi..

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe

Section 1Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 40

section. L) Income arising from educational activities has been granted exemption u/s. 11 in past & subsequent years. Income arising during the year is solely from activities of imparting education & qualifies for being exempt u/s. 11 of the LT. Act, 1961. Benefit u/s. 11 cannot be denied to income from education which is charitable object. M) Sec 11 (4A) envisage activities

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD UNIT AWARPUR CEMENT WORKS,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 345/NAG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 201

6) of the Act. (Para 33) Consequent to findings in the preceding paragraphs, the authorities below are not justified in treating the expenses incurred by the assessee for carriage inward and carriage outward as disallowable under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, and adding back Rs.1,63,78,648/- claimed as expense towards Carriage Inward and Rs.1

SATPUDA FOUNDATION,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 143/NAG/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. Moryani a/wFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234A

disallow the deemed application of income claimed u/s 11(2) amounting to Rs. 15,00,000/- as the assessee has failed to furnish the statement in Form No.10 by due date u/s 139(1) for the A.Y. 2017-18." With respect to its above observations, the Appellant has referred to the CBDT circulars pertaining to the condonation of delay

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCEL-1(2, NAGPUR vs. M/S. VIBRANT GLOBAL CAPITAL LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 229/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

disallowance made under section 14A of the Act. The assessee 3 M/s. Vibrant Global Capital Ltd. ITA no.229/Nag./2022 has not preferred any appeal against the addition upheld by learned CIT(A). The Revenue has preferred appeal in respect to additions deleted in the appeal of the assessee and are enumerated in the grounds of appeal reproduced above

SUNIL VISHAMBARNATH TIWARI,NAGPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 1(4), NAGPUR

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

ITA 240/NAG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri O.P. Kant, Am Assessment Year: 2009-10 Sunil Vishambaharnath Tiwari, Vs. I.T.O. 87, Panchvati Builders, Hindustan Ward 1(4), Colony, Wardha Road, Nagpur- Nagpur. 440015. Pan No.: Aalpt 0719 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Mahavir Atal (Ca) Revenue By : Shri Vitthal Bhosale (Sr.Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/12/2021 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-I, Nagpur Dated 30/05/2014 For The A.Y. 2009-10 Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Raised: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Endorsing The View Taken By The A.O. Of Disallowing Claim Of The Assessee. 3. Assessee Craves Leave To Add & Alter Any Other Ground That May Be Taken At The Time Of Hearing.” 2. In This Appeal, There Is Delay Of 363 Days In Filing The Present Appeal For Which The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condoning The Delay & The Contents Of The Same Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Vitthal Bhosale (Sr.DR)

disallowances made U/s 80IB of the Act, therefore, we thought it fit to adjudicate both the grounds through this consolidated order. 6 ITA 240/NAG/2015_ Sunil Vishambaharnath Tiwari Vs ITO 11. The ld. AR appearing on behalf of the assessee has reiterated the same arguments as were raised before the ld. CIT(A) and also relied upon the written submissions filed

M/S AKAY UDYOG,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 27/NAG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT–DR

11, 2022, wherein it is held that :- Section 36(1)(va), read with section 43B, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Employee's contributions (Finance Act, 2021 amendment) - Assessment year 2019-20 - Assessee-employer filed income-tax return - Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure with respect to employee's contribution towards PF/ESI on ground that there was delay in deposition of same

SUPRIYA PACKAGING PVT LTD,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 30/NAG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT–DR

11, 2022, wherein it is held that :- Section 36(1)(va), read with section 43B, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Employee's contributions (Finance Act, 2021 amendment) - Assessment year 2019-20 - Assessee-employer filed income-tax return - Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure with respect to employee's contribution towards PF/ESI on ground that there was delay in deposition of same

KAMLESH SINGH THAKUR,NAGPUR vs. ITO, NAGPUR

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 41/NAG/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT–DR

11, 2022, wherein it is held that :- Section 36(1)(va), read with section 43B, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Employee's contributions (Finance Act, 2021 amendment) - Assessment year 2019-20 - Assessee-employer filed income-tax return - Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure with respect to employee's contribution towards PF/ESI on ground that there was delay in deposition of same

M/S. FORMS,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALURU

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 20/NAG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT–DR

11, 2022, wherein it is held that :- Section 36(1)(va), read with section 43B, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Employee's contributions (Finance Act, 2021 amendment) - Assessment year 2019-20 - Assessee-employer filed income-tax return - Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure with respect to employee's contribution towards PF/ESI on ground that there was delay in deposition of same

M/S. KABRA ENGINEERING, CHANDRAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 22/NAG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT–DR

11, 2022, wherein it is held that :- Section 36(1)(va), read with section 43B, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Employee's contributions (Finance Act, 2021 amendment) - Assessment year 2019-20 - Assessee-employer filed income-tax return - Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure with respect to employee's contribution towards PF/ESI on ground that there was delay in deposition of same

SHANTI ARMS TECH PVT LTD,NAGPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 15/NAG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT–DR

11, 2022, wherein it is held that :- Section 36(1)(va), read with section 43B, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Employee's contributions (Finance Act, 2021 amendment) - Assessment year 2019-20 - Assessee-employer filed income-tax return - Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure with respect to employee's contribution towards PF/ESI on ground that there was delay in deposition of same

SUPRIYA PACKAGING PVT LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, NAGPUR

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 25/NAG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT–DR

11, 2022, wherein it is held that :- Section 36(1)(va), read with section 43B, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Employee's contributions (Finance Act, 2021 amendment) - Assessment year 2019-20 - Assessee-employer filed income-tax return - Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure with respect to employee's contribution towards PF/ESI on ground that there was delay in deposition of same

SHAMLAX METACHEM PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 99/NAG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT–DR

11, 2022, wherein it is held that :- Section 36(1)(va), read with section 43B, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Employee's contributions (Finance Act, 2021 amendment) - Assessment year 2019-20 - Assessee-employer filed income-tax return - Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure with respect to employee's contribution towards PF/ESI on ground that there was delay in deposition of same

JAIKA VEHICLE TRADE PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 90/NAG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT–DR

11, 2022, wherein it is held that :- Section 36(1)(va), read with section 43B, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Employee's contributions (Finance Act, 2021 amendment) - Assessment year 2019-20 - Assessee-employer filed income-tax return - Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure with respect to employee's contribution towards PF/ESI on ground that there was delay in deposition of same

ANKUR SEEDS PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (CPC), BANGALORE

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 182/NAG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT–DR

11, 2022, wherein it is held that :- Section 36(1)(va), read with section 43B, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Employee's contributions (Finance Act, 2021 amendment) - Assessment year 2019-20 - Assessee-employer filed income-tax return - Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure with respect to employee's contribution towards PF/ESI on ground that there was delay in deposition of same

M/S. DHANDHANIA INFOTECH ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 84/NAG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT–DR

11, 2022, wherein it is held that :- Section 36(1)(va), read with section 43B, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Employee's contributions (Finance Act, 2021 amendment) - Assessment year 2019-20 - Assessee-employer filed income-tax return - Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure with respect to employee's contribution towards PF/ESI on ground that there was delay in deposition of same