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.

14 results for “disallowance”+ Section 301clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai882Delhi662Chennai181Bangalore162Ahmedabad114Kolkata106Pune93Jaipur85Indore60Cochin50Hyderabad47Surat40Allahabad37Rajkot35Chandigarh29Lucknow21Cuttack21Visakhapatnam14Nagpur14Panaji8Karnataka7Raipur6Jodhpur5Telangana5Patna3Amritsar3SC3Ranchi2Agra2Rajasthan1Guwahati1Jabalpur1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 80P9Section 80H9Deduction9Addition to Income9Section 80P(2)(a)7Section 80I7Section 565Section 1475Disallowance5Section 142(1)

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

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

ITA 566/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Suyash RankaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56

301 PAN – AAAJH0303D\nAppellant\nIncome Tax Officer\nWard-1, Wardha\nRespondent\nAssessee by : Shri Suyash Ranka\nRevenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe\nDate of Hearing – 23/01/2025\nDate of Order – 10/02/2025\nPER K.M. ROY, Α.Μ.\nORDER\nThis appeal by the assessee is emanating from the impugned order\ndated 28/08/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax\n(Appeals), National

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 Nagpur
4
Section 234A4
Exemption4
10 Feb 2025
AY 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

301 PAN – AAAJH0303D v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–1, Wardha Assessee by : Shri Suyash Ranka Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 23/01/2025 Date of Order – 10/02/2025 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is emanating from the impugned order dated 28/08/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income

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

301 PAN – AAAJH0303D v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–1, Wardha Assessee by : Shri Suyash Ranka Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 23/01/2025 Date of Order – 10/02/2025 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is emanating from the impugned order dated 28/08/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income

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

301 PAN – AAAJH0303D v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–1, Wardha Assessee by : Shri Suyash Ranka Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 23/01/2025 Date of Order – 10/02/2025 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is emanating from the impugned order dated 28/08/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income

JEETENDRA CHANDRAKANT NAYAK,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOM TAX(OSD), NAGPUR

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

ITA 368/NAG/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jun 2024AY 2015-2016

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

For Appellant: Shri M.G.Moryani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Singhai, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 54F

disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 54F of the Act against the capital gain on transfer of long term capital asset, on the ground that the assessee owned interest in more than one residential properties and therefore, he was not entitled for deduction under section 54F of the Act. The learned assessing officer relied

COAL MINES WORKERS CREDIT CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 439/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Ms. Alfia RozieFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

disallowing the deduction claimed by the appellant co-operative society under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Appellant craves leave to add or alter any other ground that may be taken at the time of hearing.” 2 Coal Mines Workers Credit Co–operative Society Ltd. 3. Facts in Brief:– The assessee

RAHUL UDYOG,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2, AMRAVATI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 306/NAG/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Jun 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

For Appellant: Shri Rathan Sharma,C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Benjwal, CIT
Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 40A(3)

disallowance of hammali expenses (Rs.3,64,737/- ) also for reason of non-deduction of IDS on payments of Rs.2,03,212/- made to two parties, each payment being exceeding Rs.75,000/-. The appellant has not made any submissions on this issue even in appeal proceedings. Therefore, keeping in view facts of the case and specific provisions of Section

SANT TUKDOJI NAGRI SHAHKARI PAT SANSTHA LIMITED, HINGANGHAT,HINGANGHAT vs. ITO WARD - 2, WARDHA

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

ITA 356/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 144Section 234ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

301 PAN–AACAS0241C v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–2, Wardha Assessee by : Shri Kishore P. Dewani Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 05/12/2024 Date of Order – 20/12/2024 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. Captioned appeal by the assessee is against the impugned order dated 06/06/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income

JALSAMPDA KARMCHARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,WARDHA vs. ITO WARD 2 , WARDHA

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 300/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryjalsampda Karmchari Ito, Ward-2, Wardha. Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit Wardha, 1, Dr. Vs. Adyalkar Bhavan, Arvi Road, Shivaji Square, Wardha-442001 Pan: Aaaaw 0478 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jakhotia, Ld.CAFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr.DR
Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

301 days 4. Sufficient Cause for delay in filing the Appeal: Assessee hereby declare that there was no deliberate delay or gross negligence or any malafide for delay in filing the appeal. The delay was for genuine circumstances which prevailed for delay. 3 In this case, the Assessee is a cooperative society, engaged in accepting deposits and providing credit facilities

SUBHASH BADRIPRASAD SHAHU,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(3), NAGPUR

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

ITA 421/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur07 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesubhash Badriprasad Shahu, Plot No.84, Near Annapurna Dall Mill, Bagad Ganj, Small Factory Area ……………. Appellant Nagpur 440 008. Maharashtra. Pan – Agqps9660N V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–4(3), Nagpur Assessee By :Shri. Abhay Agrawal.A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri. Abhay Agrawal.A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

disallowance based on suspicions and surmises without considering the documentary evidences filed in support of genuineness of purchases and without doubting the corresponding sales. 5. Whether on the facts and in law, the learned AO erred in neither providing adverse material allegedly received from GST department, nor opportunity of cross-examination of party Shri Sanket Santosh Shahu, thereby breaching principles

M/S HIGH RISE CONSTRUCTION,,NAGPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD -1(5), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 23/NAG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Manoj MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Agnes Thomas
Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

301/- against which a deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act claimed. The AO vide order dated 24-02-2015, we note, that the assessee has violated the provisions of section 80IB(10) of the Act and the project was incomplete and denied deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act. As matter stood thus, the AO also initiated proceedings

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (2), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 177/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

section 115JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as contended by the revenue by relying on the decision in the case of Appollo Tyres Ltd. (supra). 27. In this case since we have already held that in relevant assessment year 2010-11 the incentives "Interest subsidy' and 'Power subsidy' is a 'capital receipt and does not fall within the definition

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

section 115JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as contended by the revenue by relying on the decision in the case of Appollo Tyres Ltd. (supra). 27. In this case since we have already held that in relevant assessment year 2010-11 the incentives "Interest subsidy' and 'Power subsidy' is a 'capital receipt and does not fall within the definition

INCOME TAX , WARD -1(4), NAGPUR vs. M/S WADHWANI IMPEX, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 84/NAG/2019[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur13 Jan 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Himesh DembleFor Respondent: Smt. Agnesh P. Thomas
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80H

301, Business Plaza, Ramdaspeth, Nagpur-440 010 PAN: AAAFW1327L ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Himesh Demble Revenue by : Smt. Agnesh P. Thomas सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 13.01.2020 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 13.01.2020 आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM : This appeal preferred by the Revenue emanates from the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-1, Nagpur