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.

5 results for “disallowance”+ Section 54Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi63Bangalore27Surat27Pune25Ahmedabad25Jaipur22Mumbai21Indore20Chennai14Raipur12Rajkot9Hyderabad6Kolkata6Chandigarh5Nagpur5Karnataka5Amritsar3Visakhapatnam2Cuttack2Jabalpur2Jodhpur2Agra2Dehradun1SC1Cochin1Varanasi1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 54B17Section 26313Section 1488Section 143(3)5Exemption5Section 1474Section 54E3Deduction3Reassessment3Section 143(1)

FATTESING PUNAJI DHABRE,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX – 2, NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 368/NAG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Fattesing Punaji Dhabre Pcit – 2, Nagpur Plot No. 132, Chandan Nagar, Post Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Hanuman Nagar, Nagpur, Maharashtra – 440001. Maharashtra – 440009. [Pan: Bacpd6505Q] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Madhav Vichare, Ca Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit–Dr Date Of Hearing 17.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)Section 263Section 54B

54B. Thus, the assessment order is erroneous and in so far as prejudicial to the interest of revenue. On other legal submission of ld. AR of the assessee submits that revision was proposed by assessing officer on the report of audit objection, would submit that it is an internal communication of department. Fact remains the Fattesing Punaji Dhabre same that

2
Section 142(1)2
Capital Gains2

SUSHILA BHAURAO DESHMUKH,AMRAVATI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 76/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: ShriK.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Salunke
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 54BSection 54E

54B for claiming benefit of exemption is complied with.‖ 13. Decision of ITAT, Pune Bench, in the case of Ramesh Narhari Jakhadi v/s ITO in ITA No.36/Pune/1990 for the assessment year 1986-87 order dated 20/02/1992 reported at [1992] 41 ITD 0368, also supports the submission of assessee in the case of assessee agricultural land is sold on 22/03/2017

MAROTRAO LAXMAN KHADSE,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 187/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.187/Nag/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Marotrao Laxman Khadse, The Income Tax Address: 4, Ward No.1, Vs Officer, Ward-3(4), Hdkeshwar, District: Nagpur. Nagpur. Maharashtra – 440034. Pan: Cropk0636B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe– Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 23/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac],Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 26.04.2022 Emanating From The Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Act, 1961 Dated 16.12.2019. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : Marotrao Laxman Khadse [A]

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 50CSection 54B

disallowing the claim of expenditure towards improvement of Land of Rs. 6,00,000/-. 3. The assessee craves for leave to add, amend, alter or delete any of the grounds of appeal with the permission of the Hon’ble Tribunal.” Submission of ld.AR : 2. At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee

SHRI PRABODH SADASHIV SADAVARTE (HUF), NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(4),, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 377/NAG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Aug 2023AY 2006-07

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

For Appellant: Shri Saket BhattadFor Respondent: Smt. Rashmi Mathur
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 54B

disallowed an amount of Rs.24,57,440/- u/s. 54B of the Act, wherein, he denied the deduction to the assessee by holding that the assessee being HUF is not entitled to claim deduction u/s. 54B of the Act vide order dated 26-03-2014. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred an appeal before

PRABODH SADASHIV SADAVARTEM(HUF),NAGPUR vs. I.T.O.(TDS) WARD -1(4), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 547/NAG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Aug 2023AY 2006-07

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

For Appellant: Shri Saket BhattadFor Respondent: Smt. Rashmi Mathur
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 54B

disallowed an amount of Rs.24,57,440/- u/s. 54B of the Act, wherein, he denied the deduction to the assessee by holding that the assessee being HUF is not entitled to claim deduction u/s. 54B of the Act vide order dated 26-03-2014. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred an appeal before