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.

10 results for “disallowance”+ Addition to Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai22,696Delhi17,191Kolkata6,181Chennai5,985Bangalore5,055Ahmedabad2,404Pune2,078Hyderabad1,644Jaipur1,448Surat970Indore893Chandigarh863Cochin647Rajkot526Nagpur490Visakhapatnam479Raipur477Lucknow448Karnataka386Amritsar363Cuttack339Ranchi179Agra175Jodhpur174Patna171Guwahati169Panaji165Telangana149Dehradun124Calcutta123SC92Jabalpur90Allahabad87Kerala47Varanasi36Punjab & Haryana26Rajasthan11Orissa10Himachal Pradesh4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Gauhati2Uttarakhand2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1Bombay1Tripura1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Section 14810Addition to Income7Disallowance6Section 2(22)(e)4Section 260A3Section 803Section 14A3Section 143(1)3Section 143(3)3Deduction

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,BHUBANESWAR vs. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF ORISSA LTD.

In the result, the appeal stands disposed of in terms of

ITA/33/2017HC Orissa14 Nov 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Section 115Section 115JSection 14Section 14ASection 260Section 45(2)

addition to book profits under Section 115 JB towards expenditure on exempt income is purely academic in nature as the Tribunal has held that no disallowances

M/S.SHEETAL REAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, the appeal fails and the substantial questions of law

3
Section 2602
Capital Gains2
ITA/83/2010HC Orissa08 Feb 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 372A

additional deductions, had the income been shown as profits of business, but has not been claimed. Thus the CIT(A) concluded that on the overall assessment of the facts and circumstances of the case leads to the clear and inevitable conclusion that the intention of the assessee was clear in making profit from turnover and not by way of return

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. M/S. ROLAND EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST

ITA/25/2022HC Orissa09 Feb 2023

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

disallowances u/ s 14A read with rule 8D also applicable in the case. The statement given by Shri Himanshu Verma also establishes the link with the self-confessed “accommodation entry providers” whose business is to help assessees bring back their unaccounted money into This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 vs. PARBATI MOHAPATRA

ITA/19/2022HC Orissa08 Feb 2023

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

disallowances u/ s 14A read with rule 8D also applicable in the case. The statement given by Shri Himanshu Verma also establishes the link with the self-confessed “accommodation entry providers” whose business is to help assessees bring back their unaccounted money into This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi

PURI HOTEL P.LTD vs. ADDL.COMNR.OF TAX

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms

ITA/151/2004HC Orissa04 Jan 2022

Bench: The Tribunal?

Section 254

Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Orissa, Bhubaneswar …. Respondent Mr.T.K.Satpathy, Sr. Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 04.01.2022 09. 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 3rd April, 2004 passed by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, (ITAT

NALCO vs. COMNR.OF INCOME TAX

ITA/133/2012HC Orissa09 May 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani & The Hon’Ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj Date : 16Th January, 2024 Appearance : Sri Vipul Kundalia, Adv. Smt. Oindrilla Ghosal, Adv. ...For The Appellant. Sri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Sri Sanjoy Bhaumik, Adv. Smt. Swapna Das, Adv. ...For The Respondent. 1. Heard Sri Vipul Kundalia, Learned Senior Standing Counsel For The Appellant/Revenue & Sri J.P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Advocate Assisted By Sri Sanjoy Bhaumik & Smt. Swapna Das, Learned Advocates For The Respondent/Assessee. 2. This Appeal Was Admitted By This Court By An Order Dated 30.11.2012 On The Following Substantial Questions Of Law: “1) Whether In View Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Instant Case The Tribunal Erred By Not Considering That Subsides Which May Be Used Freely

Section 43(6)Section 89

income? 2) Whether the Hon’ble ITAT has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the disallowance made by Assessing Officer on account of claim of deduction of proportionate amount of lease hold land written off of Rs.20,50,052? 3) Whether the Hon’ble ITAT has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 vs. KAMAL LOCHAN DAS

In the result, the appeal fails and the substantial question of law is

ITA/23/2023HC Orissa02 Mar 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Acting Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 3Rd April, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ….For Appellant Mr. Subash Agarwal, Adv. …For Respondent The Court : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20Th May, 2022 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, `B’ Bench, Kolkata In Ita No.78/Kol./2022 For The Assessment Year 2019-20. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Question Of Law For Consideration : - “Whether The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Has Committed Substantial Error In Law In Deleting The Addition Made On Account Of Disallowance Of Deduction Under Section 80-Ic Of The Act ? ”

Section 260ASection 80

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed substantial error in law in deleting the addition made on account of disallowance of deduction

M/S.BHASKAR TRADERS vs. ASST.COMMKNR.OF INCOME TAX,BERHAMPUR

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/174/2018HC Orissa30 Mar 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 68

additions made under Section 2(22)(e) goes, both the authorities held that the assessee had provided security by way of mortgage of his personal property so that M/s Pilot Industries could obtain bank loans. In lieu of that security, assessee was provided with loans. This kind of transaction though facially suspect, stands sufficiently explained. The Court also notices that

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2) vs. M/S. SERAJUDDIN AND CO.

ITA/44/2022HC Orissa15 Mar 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak Date : 26Th July, 2022 Appearance :- Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. … For Appellant Mr. S.M. Surana, Adv. Mr. Bhaskar Sengupta, Adv. Md. Afzal Ansari, Adv. … For Respondent

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 260A

addition of Rs.8,40,000/- towards capital gain from sale of cars. The Learned Income Tax Appellant Tribunal has considered that capital gain from sale of cars would qualify for exemption under section 11(1A) of the Act since the tax effect on this issue is less than the threshold limit? (iii) Whether disallowance

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. INDRANI PATNAIK

ITA/55/2022HC Orissa18 Dec 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,MR. JUSTICE M.S.SAHOO

Section 69C

INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2 ..... Appellant Through Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate. versus IMPERIAL HOUSING VENTURES P. LTD. ..... Respondent Through None. % Date of Decision: 21st March, 2022 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA J U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J (Oral) 1. Present appeal has been filed challenging the order dated