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 40(1)(i)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai7,594Delhi6,480Chennai2,417Bangalore2,323Kolkata2,218Ahmedabad1,672Pune1,154Hyderabad1,077Jaipur996Indore596Chandigarh541Surat502Visakhapatnam384Cochin383Raipur308Cuttack298Rajkot280Nagpur266Karnataka240Amritsar237Lucknow155Guwahati122Ranchi100Allahabad97Panaji95Agra67Patna67Telangana64Jodhpur63Calcutta59SC57Dehradun53Jabalpur46Kerala30Varanasi28Orissa5Punjab & Haryana5Rajasthan4Gauhati2Himachal Pradesh1J&K1Tripura1Uttarakhand1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 2635Disallowance4Section 260A3Section 402Section 143(3)2Section 195(1)2Set Off of Losses2

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

1) was issued on several dates and the case was discussed with the authorised representative of the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings several queries were raised by the assessing officer and in this appeal we are concerned about the issue as to whether the profit of Rs 4,32,09,144/- on sale of shares in six companies

COMNR.OF INCOME TAX vs. PARADEEP PHOSPHATES

ITA/113/2013HC Orissa15 Nov 2022

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

Section 143(3)Section 195(1)Section 263Section 40

disallowance of expenditure of Rs.1344,63,25,000/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. According to the CIT, the aforementioned sum claimed as expenditure towards import value of machinery, spares and raw materials and charged to the P&L account would not be eligible for deduction since the Assessee had not deducted tax under Section 195(1

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 vs. INDIAN METALS AND FERRO ALLOYS SLTD.

The Appeal is dismissed

ITA/145/2018HC Orissa07 Feb 2024

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI,MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY

Section 40

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Learned counsel for the parties are present. Judgment prepared in separate sheets is delivered and pronounced in open Court in the presence of learned counsel for the parties and the order is passed accordingly as follows:- 3. In the present case, the assessing officer has not relied

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

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 of exemption under section 11(1

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXEXEMPTIONS,HYDERABAD vs. SIKSHYA O ANUSANDHAN

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA/37/2018HC Orissa03 Jan 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : February 15, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. Debasish Chowdhury, Adv. … For The Appellant Mr. R.K. Murarka, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sutapa Roy Choudhury, Adv. Ms. Aratrika Roy, Adv. … For The Respondent The Court : This Appeal By The Revenue Filed Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 3Rd May, 2017 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) In

Section 14ASection 260ASection 73

40,879/- instead of normal business income without considering the fact that frequency of transaction, non-maintenance of separate demat account of investment and for trading suggests that sale of shares are normal business income in nature? c) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench Kolkata, erred