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.

90 results for “disallowance”+ Section 36(1)(viii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,279 Mumbai1,222 Bangalore416 Chennai220 Kolkata190 Jaipur157 Ahmedabad153 Chandigarh138 Cochin96 Hyderabad92 Nagpur90 Indore77 Rajkot50 Pune49 Visakhapatnam42 Cuttack40 Surat40 Calcutta39 Lucknow37 Guwahati34 Ranchi33 Raipur33 Telangana29 Karnataka28 Allahabad22 Jodhpur12 Patna11 SC10 Varanasi8 Dehradun7 Agra7 Amritsar5 Kerala5 Rajasthan2 Jabalpur2 Panaji1 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 153C85 Section 153A39 Section 6839 Section 143(3)34 Addition to Income33 Section 69A32 Section 44A28 Section 4020 Section 36(1)(viia)19 Deduction

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

disallowance on account of deduction under section 36(1)(viii) of the Act and addition of ` 2,77,22,160 Vidarbha

Showing 1–20 of 90 · Page 1 of 5

16

Search & Seizure16

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

disallowance on account of deduction under section 36(1)(viii) of the Act and addition of ` 2,77,22,160 Vidarbha

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)

section 36(1)(vii) of the Act, filed appeal before the first appellate authority. 12. The learned CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee’s claim by observing as under:– Chandrapur District Central Co–operative Bank “5.2 Ground No.2 to 4: In these grounds, the appellant has challenged the addition of Rs.1,86,04,975 on account of disallowance of deduction

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)

section 36(1)(vii) of the Act, filed appeal before the first appellate authority. 12. The learned CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee’s claim by observing as under:– Chandrapur District Central Co–operative Bank “5.2 Ground No.2 to 4: In these grounds, the appellant has challenged the addition of Rs.1,86,04,975 on account of disallowance of deduction

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)

section 36(1)(vii) of the Act, filed appeal before the first appellate authority. 12. The learned CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee’s claim by observing as under:– Chandrapur District Central Co–operative Bank “5.2 Ground No.2 to 4: In these grounds, the appellant has challenged the addition of Rs.1,86,04,975 on account of disallowance of deduction

PRADEEP KUNDU,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

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

ITA 123/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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

HERD MEDICAL FOUNDATION PVT LTD,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX

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

ITA 138/NAG/2021[201/-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

SOHAN HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD,YAVATMAL vs. ADIT, CPC, BANGALORE

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

ITA 151/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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

M/S. MINI IRON AND STEEL PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCEL-3, NAGPUR

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

ITA 131/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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

JAIKA VEHICLE TRADE PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIKA BUILDING vs. ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX , CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE

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

ITA 104/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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

MAHAVIR COAL WASHIERS PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. DCIT, CPC , BANGALORE

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

ITA 149/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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

SEQUEL MOTORS PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

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

ITA 144/NAG/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

PRADEEP KUNDU,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

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

ITA 122/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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

PREMCHAND KANHAIYALAL THAKUR,AMRAVATI vs. DCIT, CPC,, BENGALURU

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

ITA 110/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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

HERD MEDICAL FOUNDATION PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERS, WARD-4(2), NAGPUR

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

ITA 139/NAG/2021[F.Y.2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

HANSA CITY BUS SERVICES(NAGPUR) P LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

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

ITA 145/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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

JAIKA VEHICLE TRADE PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

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

ITA 103/NAG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

SHAMLAX METACHEM PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

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

ITA 100/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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

MAHAVIR COAL WASHIERS PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

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

ITA 150/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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about

NARESH JAMPRASAD TIWARI,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

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

ITA 163/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

36(1)(va) Explanation-2 – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of Section 43B shall not apply and shall be deemed never to have been applied for the purpose of determining the „due date‟ under this clause‟ 18. We find that this amendment has been brought in the Act to provide certainty about