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.

7 results for “disallowance”+ Section 148Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai171Ahmedabad66Delhi65Jaipur61Kolkata38Hyderabad32Bangalore29Chennai28Visakhapatnam27Pune25Raipur16Surat14Chandigarh13Rajkot10Guwahati9Indore9Lucknow7Nagpur7Agra4Cochin4Ranchi2Karnataka2Jabalpur2Jodhpur1Calcutta1Amritsar1Cuttack1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 1489Section 2638Section 1477Addition to Income7Section 69C6Section 105Section 148A5Exemption5Section 564Section 80P

SUNRISE STRUCTURALS & ENGINEERING PVT LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4 NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 167/NAG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roysunrise Structural & Acit/Dcit, Circle-4, Engineering P. Ltd., A10, Vs Nagpur Hingna Midc, Nagpur (Urban), Nagpur-440016 Pan : Aaccs 3220 M Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234BSection 250Section 69C
4

148A(b). Reliance on : i) 150 taxmann.com 99 (Bom) Anurag Gupta vs. ITO (P- 135 – 139) (138) [Vol.- III] 3. Ground No.2 to 7: Addition Rs.6,77,58,435/- u/s 69C of I.T. Act 1961 is respect of purchases recorded in books of account. A) Regular books of account maintained duly audited by Chartered Accountants. Tax Audit Report submitted with

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

ITA 568/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri Suyash RankaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56Section 80P

148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was provided to the assessee with prior approval from competent authority vide dated 23/03/2022 wherein the assessee was given a show cause as to why following income/receipts shall not be treated as income chargeable to tax which has escaped the assessment within the meaning of provision of section

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

ITA 569/NAG/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2022-23

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

For Appellant: Shri Suyash RankaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56Section 80P

148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was provided to the assessee with prior approval from competent authority vide dated 23/03/2022 wherein the assessee was given a show cause as to why following income/receipts shall not be treated as income chargeable to tax which has escaped the assessment within the meaning of provision of section

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

ITA 567/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Suyash RankaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56Section 80P

148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was provided to the assessee with prior approval from competent authority vide dated 23/03/2022 wherein the assessee was given a show cause as to why following income/receipts shall not be treated as income chargeable to tax which has escaped the assessment within the meaning of provision of section

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

ITA 566/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Suyash RankaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(1)

148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was provided to the assessee with prior approval from competent authority vide dated 23/03/2022 wherein the assessee was given a show cause as to why following income/receipts shall not be treated as income chargeable to tax which has escaped the assessment within the meaning of provision of section

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE (EXEMPTIONS), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. VASANTRAO NAIK STATE AGRICULTURE EXTENTION MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 208/NAG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Shubham JainFor Respondent: Shri Anand Nagrale
Section 10Section 10(23)Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148A

disallowing the deduction u/s 10(22C)(ab) on Aggrieved with the above, the appellant is before” 3 Vasantrao Naik State Agriculture Extension Management Institute ITA no.208/Nag./2025 4. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) held that the assessee is entitled to claim exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act and allowed the appeal of the assessee. The observations

NIRMALKUMAR AGRAWAL HUF,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BHANDARA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Loya a/wFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263

section 148A(d) of another assessee is vague, nebulous and fragile. 10 Nirmalkumar Agrawal (HUF) ITA no.242/Nag./2025 8. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative submitted that the creditworthiness of the company is doubtful and hence there is a miserable lack of enquiry on the part of the Assessing Officer and accordingly revisionary proceedings has been rightly initiated