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.

8 results for “disallowance”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai8,788Delhi5,779Chennai3,140Kolkata2,400Bangalore2,326Ahmedabad1,020Pune827Hyderabad602Jaipur582Cochin325Indore308Chandigarh287Karnataka262Surat257Nagpur243Raipur235Lucknow222Rajkot208Visakhapatnam169Cuttack122Amritsar114Calcutta77Guwahati74Jodhpur65SC61Telangana54Panaji46Agra46Ranchi44Dehradun37Patna36Kerala24Allahabad21Varanasi17Jabalpur17Punjab & Haryana8Orissa8Rajasthan7Himachal Pradesh5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Gauhati2ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Section 14A8Disallowance6Section 2604Section 260A3Exemption3Section 45(2)2Section 11(1)(a)2Section 11(1)(d)2Deduction2Capital Gains

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)

disallowance of 3 expenditure of earning exempt income under Sec.14A of the Act by erroneously holding that no disallowance is called

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.KRUPAJAL TRUST

Accordingly, the review petitions are allowed and the order dated

2
Addition to Income2
Depreciation2
ITA/65/2018HC Orissa10 Apr 2024

Bench: DR. JUSTICE B.R.SARANGI,MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY

Section 14ASection 36(1)

disallowing expenditure incurred in earning exempted income u/s. 14A of IT Act and disallowing the claim of deduction for advances

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

exemption under section 11(1A) of the Act since the tax effect on this issue is less than the threshold limit? (iii) Whether disallowance

M/S.SHEETAL REAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

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

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

disallowed and earning of exempt income. The revenue failed to substantiate their argument that the assessee was required to maintain

ASHIRBAD BEHERA vs. ASST.COMMNR.OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal [ITA/7/2020] filed by the

ITA/19/2015HC Orissa03 Mar 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 27Th February, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Smita Das De, Adv. …For The Appellant. Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv. Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. …For The Respondent.. The Court : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’ For Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18Th May, 2016 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata (The Tribunal) In Ita No.665/Kol/2012 & Ita No.325/Kol/2012 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. The Appeal Was Admitted On 12Th December, 2019 On The Following Substantial Question Of Law: “(I) Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Erred In Law In Holding That The Assessee Has Sufficient Own Funds, Expenditure By Way Of Interest Are Not To Be Taken In Account

Section 14ASection 260ASection 32(1)(iia)

disallowed and earning of exempt income. The respondents as earlier noted, have failed to substantiate their argument that the assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 vs. SEKHAR KUMAR MOHAPATRA

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed

ITA/65/2022HC Orissa11 Oct 2023

Bench: DR. JUSTICE B.R.SARANGI (ACJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Section 10(34)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 260

EXEMPTIONS RANGE, BENGALURU & ETC., THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue. This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short) has been filed against the order dated 20.07.2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, BBSR vs. RADHESHYAM SINGHANIA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/85/2022HC Orissa10 Oct 2023

Bench: DR. JUSTICE B.R.SARANGI (ACJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. 1. Present appeal has been filed challenging the Order dated 18 ITA No.85/2022 th February, 2020 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’) in ITA No. 5618/Del./2017 for the Assessment Year 2013-14. This is a digitally signed Judgement. NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/001375 ITA No.85/2022

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 vs. M/S.JAGANNATH CHAUDHURY

The appeal is disposed of as indicated above

ITA/1/2018HC Orissa18 Dec 2019

Bench: MR. JUSTICE K. S. JHAVERI (CJ),MR. JUSTICE K.R.MOHAPATRA

For Appellant: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXFor Respondent: M/S. SAHYADRI CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD

disallowed the deduction claimed under Section 80P of the Act. Further, the Assessing Officer concludes that the assessee earned income from interest on deposits from members and deposits made in scheduled Banks from trading commodities and interest from call money depositors. In view of the view taken by the Assessing Officer, the said income has been treated as income from