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.

11 results for “disallowance”+ Section 801A(9)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai218 Delhi166 Hyderabad107 Ahmedabad102 Kolkata58 Chennai44 Bangalore36 Pune32 Indore22 Chandigarh18 Jaipur17 Visakhapatnam15 Rajkot13 Nagpur11 Surat10 Patna10 Raipur8 Dehradun7 Cuttack7 Lucknow5 Jodhpur5 Cochin4 Guwahati4 Amritsar2 Calcutta1 Karnataka1

Key Topics

Section 80I31 Section 143(3)10 Section 1549 Section 139(1)9 Addition to Income7 Section 801A6 Section 139(5)6 Section 1486 Section 106 Deduction

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. M/S. GONDWAN A ENGINEERS LTD, NAGPUR

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

ITA 420/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 8Section 801ASection 801A(4)Section 80ASection 80I

section 801A of the Act at ` 9,05,20,790, and declared net income at ` 1,17,80,750. The Assessing Officer, however, disallowed

6

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

9. We have heard the rival arguments, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the assessee had filed computation of income, audited Profit & Loss A/c of windmill undertakings and income tax return for the preceding years from 2006-07 to 2011-12 which were set off against the profits

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

9. We have heard the rival arguments, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the assessee had filed computation of income, audited Profit & Loss A/c of windmill undertakings and income tax return for the preceding years from 2006-07 to 2011-12 which were set off against the profits

SANJAY SHANKARRAO JADHAO,AMRAVATI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 198/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 143(3)Section 250

disallowed the claim of deduction under section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act. Shri Sanjay Shankarrao Jadhao ITA no.198/Mum./2023 8. Before the learned CIT(A), the assessee filed an elaborated written reply along with Form no.10CCB and relied upon certain judicial pronouncements which are noted by the learned CIT(A) in his order. The learned CIT(A), after considering

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

801A as per Section 80A (5) of the Act as Assessee had not claimed the deduction in the Return of Income. 7.9 Thus, the Law laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court(supra) and Hon'ble Kerala High Court is that Assessee has to claim Deduction Under Chapter VIA of the Act under the heading "C.-Deductions

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

801A as per Section 80A (5) of the Act as Assessee had not claimed the deduction in the Return of Income. 7.9 Thus, the Law laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court(supra) and Hon'ble Kerala High Court is that Assessee has to claim Deduction Under Chapter VIA of the Act under the heading "C.-Deductions

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

801A as per Section 80A (5) of the Act as Assessee had not claimed the deduction in the Return of Income. 7.9 Thus, the Law laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court(supra) and Hon'ble Kerala High Court is that Assessee has to claim Deduction Under Chapter VIA of the Act under the heading "C.-Deductions

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-1(3), NAGPUR vs. SHRI KIRIT SHARAD JOSHI, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 609/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.C. Thakar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT–DR

801A was introduced by Finance Act, 2009 in relation to clarifying subsection (4) of section 80IA. It was specifically mentioned that the Explanation was w.r.e.f. 01.04.2000. 8.2 In fact, there is no dispute on the fact that the amendment in the Finance Act, 2013 in Explanation 1 to section 10(10D) is effective from 01.04.2014 and has no retrospective effect

M/S SMS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,NAGPUR vs. D.C.I.T. CENTRALCIRCLE 2(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 566/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Saket BhattadFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Marathe

Section 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 801ASection 80ASection 80I

801A of the Act. The delay in filling the return is not willful and the assessee has not been benefited by filling the return late. M/s. SMS Infrastructure Ltd. ITA no.566/Nag./2016 (3) That any other grounds may be raised during the course of hearing of this appeal.” 3. Facts in brief:- The assessee is a company engaged

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR vs. M/S SUNFLAG IRON & STEEL CO. LTD. , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 269/NAG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos. 268 & 269/Nag/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Nagpur. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. 33, Mount Road, Sadar, Nagpur-440 001 Pan : Aaccs3376C ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rachit Thakar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Headoo, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

9 DCIT, Circle-2 Vs. M/s. Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. ITA Nos. 268 & 269/NAG/2018 terms of our aforesaid observations concur with the view taken by the CIT(Appeals). Thus, the Ground of appeal No.1 raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 8. We shall now advert to the claim of the Revenue that the CIT(Appeals) had erred in vacating

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR vs. M/S SUNFLAG IRON & STEEL CO. LTD. , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 268/NAG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos. 268 & 269/Nag/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Nagpur. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. 33, Mount Road, Sadar, Nagpur-440 001 Pan : Aaccs3376C ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rachit Thakar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Headoo, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

9 DCIT, Circle-2 Vs. M/s. Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. ITA Nos. 268 & 269/NAG/2018 terms of our aforesaid observations concur with the view taken by the CIT(Appeals). Thus, the Ground of appeal No.1 raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 8. We shall now advert to the claim of the Revenue that the CIT(Appeals) had erred in vacating