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.

2 results for “disallowance”+ Section 95clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,725Delhi2,965Chennai926Bangalore878Ahmedabad838Kolkata804Pune608Hyderabad557Jaipur406Indore329Chandigarh289Surat199Cochin179Visakhapatnam172Raipur140Cuttack105Amritsar100Lucknow96Agra88Rajkot78Nagpur73Guwahati62Calcutta47Karnataka46Ranchi46Patna36Allahabad27Jodhpur23Telangana23Dehradun21SC20Panaji17Jabalpur15Varanasi5Punjab & Haryana2Orissa2Kerala2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 69C2

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

95% and the same cannot be said that the period of holding was small. Further with regard to the opinion of the assessing officer that the assessee conducted its activities in a systematic and organised manner, the assessee stated that they being a listed company are expected to carry on their activities in a systematic and organised manner and therefore

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

95,500/- as ‘unexplained expenditure’ in complete disregard of the system of accounting and the applicable accounting standards. August, 2020 passed by ITAT in ITA No. 6448/Del/2015 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. This is a digitally signed Judgement. NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/000993 ITA No.55/2022 Page 2 of 4 3. Having perused the paper book, this Court finds that