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.

70 results for “disallowance”+ Section 70clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,642Delhi3,887Chennai1,270Bangalore1,268Kolkata1,031Ahmedabad600Jaipur489Hyderabad460Indore279Chandigarh278Pune271Surat259Raipur161Cochin139Lucknow132Rajkot114Cuttack109Karnataka89Agra87Amritsar84Visakhapatnam83Nagpur70Allahabad51Calcutta47Ranchi44Jodhpur37Telangana29Guwahati28SC26Dehradun24Patna22Varanasi20Panaji14Jabalpur8Punjab & Haryana5Kerala3Himachal Pradesh2Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 153C97Section 143(3)59Addition to Income59Section 153A56Disallowance32Section 6831Section 25027Section 80I27Section 14826Deduction

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the A

ITA 391/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur27 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Agrawal
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

70 (Raj) 11 The Nirmal Ujwal Credit Co–operative Society Ltd. A.Y.2014–15 Considering plethora of judgments on said issue, we humbly request your kindness to kindly revoke impugned disallowances. 23. The provision of section

Showing 1–20 of 70 · Page 1 of 4

25
Section 26322
Search & Seizure11

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

70,000/- in Axis Bank and received interest income of Rs. 15,81,842/-\nfrom banks on which TDS is deducted. It is seen that the assessee has not\nfiled his return of income for AY 2015-16. The above transactions, total to\namount Rs.1,32,51,842/- remain unexplained and there is escapement of\nincome in absence of return

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

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

disallowing the benefit of Sec 80P of Rs.53,72,108/- based on the same, even 2 Hinganghat Nagri Sahakari Pat Sanstha ITA no.569/Nag./2024 after the return was filed within Assessment Proceeding as on 17.01.2023 bearing Ack No. 923756621170123 which is acknowledged in the Assessment Order itself. 3. That the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had erred in law and facts

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

disallowing the benefit of Sec 80P of Rs.53,72,108/- based on the same, even 2 Hinganghat Nagri Sahakari Pat Sanstha ITA no.569/Nag./2024 after the return was filed within Assessment Proceeding as on 17.01.2023 bearing Ack No. 923756621170123 which is acknowledged in the Assessment Order itself. 3. That the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had erred in law and facts

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

disallowing the benefit of Sec 80P of Rs.53,72,108/- based on the same, even 2 Hinganghat Nagri Sahakari Pat Sanstha ITA no.569/Nag./2024 after the return was filed within Assessment Proceeding as on 17.01.2023 bearing Ack No. 923756621170123 which is acknowledged in the Assessment Order itself. 3. That the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had erred in law and facts

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 176/NAG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 10(34)Section 10(35)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 24

disallowing the deemed dividend of Rs.6,49,70,741 (Rs.6,46,05,741 + Rs.3,65,000) (Revised after rectification to Rs. 1,72,80,539/-). 11. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.40,63,928/- made on account of unexplained cash deposits

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S MAHAVIR GLOBAL COAL LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 101/NAG/2018[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Dec 2024AY 2012-2013

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

For Appellant: Ms. Alfia RozieFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 4Section 801ASection 80I

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section 80IA for ` 64,70,325. Thus, grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, KHAMGAON, KHAMGAON vs. RENUKA OIL INDUSTRIES, KHAMGAON

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 390/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 154Section 35A

70,349 as bogus expenditure being not supported with credible evidence and hence deduction u/s 35AD was held not allowable on such expenditure. However, as the entire claim u/s 35AD was already disallowed by AO, no separate disallowance of these expenses was done. Aggrieved by the said assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal beofore

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. THE VIDARBHA CO OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 196/NAG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry& Shri K.M. Roy

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Moriyani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 2(19)Section 250Section 70Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

disallowance of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of interest income received from the Co-operative Banks. The assessee is a registered Co-operative Housing Society and during the assessment year 2018-19 earned interest income of Rs. 50,39,861 from the investments made in various Co-operative Banks. 9. Before proceeding further

JAI KONDESHWAR NAGARI SAHAKARI BADNERAPAT SANSTHA MARYADIT ,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3, AMRAVATI, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 275/NAG/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Jun 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, Ld. Sr.DR
Section 2(19)Section 250Section 70Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

disallowance of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of interest income received from the Co-operative Banks. The assessee is a registered Co-operative Housing Society and during the assessment year 2018-19 earned interest income of Rs. 50,39,861 from the investments made in various Co-operative Banks. 9. Before proceeding further

BHATADI OPENCAST KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT ,BHATADI,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD-1, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 89/NAG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Ms. Veena Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anand Nagrale, Sr.DR
Section 2(19)Section 250Section 70Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowance of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of interest income received from the Co-operative Banks. The assessee is a 3 ITA.No. 89/NAG/2025 registered Co-operative Housing Society and during the assessment year 2018-19 earned interest income of Rs. 50,39,861 from the investments made in various Co-operative Banks. 9. Before

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU AJAY SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the A

ITA 30/NAG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 May 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 5Section 80I

70,744. Thereafter, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 29/09/2015, which was duly served upon the assessee. The assessee filed a letter on 07/10/2015, stating that the revised return filed under section 139(5) of the Act may be treated as return filed in response to notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act. The notice

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU AJAY SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the A

ITA 32/NAG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 May 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 5Section 80I

70,744. Thereafter, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 29/09/2015, which was duly served upon the assessee. The assessee filed a letter on 07/10/2015, stating that the revised return filed under section 139(5) of the Act may be treated as return filed in response to notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act. The notice

A,C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.- 2(2), NAGPUR vs. SHRI DHARAMPAL R.AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue's appeal being ITA no

ITA 293/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40

70,000/-, without discussing anything on merit.\n12. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned\nCIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made on account of disallowance of\nrebate and remissions of Rs. 6,75,513/-, without discussing anything on merit.\n13. On the facts and in the circumstances

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue's appeal being ITA no

ITA 172/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: \nShri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40

70,000/-, without discussing anything on merit.\n12. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned\nCIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made on account of disallowance of\nrebate and remissions of Rs. 6,75,513/-, without discussing anything on merit.\n13. On the facts and in the circumstances

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue's appeal being ITA no

ITA 171/NAG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2006-07
For Appellant: \nShri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: \nShri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40

70,000/-, without discussing anything on merit.\n12. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned\nCIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made on account of disallowance of\nrebate and remissions of Rs. 6,75,513/-, without discussing anything on merit.\n13. On the facts and in the circumstances

SHRI SACHIN M. SATHONE,,NAGPUR vs. ACIT-CIRCLE-6,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 212/NAG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Nov 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.212/Nag/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Shri Sachin M. Sathone, The Acit, Circle-6, 209, Jai Maa Durga V Nagpur. Apartment, S Kdk Colege Road, Nandanvan, Nagpur – 440009. Pan: Asrps9582N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Rachit Thakar – Ar Revenue By Shri Rajat Singhal – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08/11/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, Of Ld.Cit(A)-Ii, Nagpur Dated 11.12.2013 For A.Y.2008-09 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 31.12.2010. The Grounds Of Appeal Filed By The Assessee Are As Under : “1] Learned C.I.T.(A) Erred In Disallowing Salary Etc. Amounting To Rs.4,99,431/- Being 30% Of Total Salary Of Rs. 16,64,770/- On The Shri Sachin M. Sathone [A]

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 292

section 143(3) of the Act, dated 31.12.2010. The grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are as under : “1] Learned C.I.T.(A) erred in disallowing salary etc. amounting to Rs.4,99,431/- being 30% of total salary of Rs. 16,64,770/- on the Shri Sachin M. Sathone [A] ground that the appellant did not file designation

MOHANLAL KALAJII SUTHAR,NAGPUR vs. DY, CIT CIR.1, NAGPUR

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 22/NAG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.22/Nag/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Mohanlal Kalaji Suthar, The Dy.Cit, Circle-1, Vinayaka Metal Indus, Shop Vs. Nagpur. No.04, Sai Wadi Sankul, Midc T Point, Amravati Road, Wadi, Nagpur – 440023. Pan: Arrps 5022 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri G.J.Ninawe – Dr Date Of Hearing 14/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 10/01/2023

Section 143(3)

section 143(3) r.w.s 147 assessment only disallowing the alleged bogus purchases of Rs.28,70,544/- sourced from hawala operators

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

70,00,000/– and after reducing investment made as per section 54B, the assessee has suffered capital loss and in second working in considering deemed sale consideration of `. 1.20 crore, the assessee also suffered capital loss. The assessee also furnished detail explanation and submitted that if valuation of property as on 01.04.1981 is not acceptable