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 133(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,417Delhi2,060Kolkata820Bangalore540Ahmedabad522Jaipur379Chennai308Pune269Surat212Indore199Chandigarh193Hyderabad143Raipur118Cochin92Lucknow75Rajkot66Visakhapatnam61Cuttack61Nagpur56Amritsar53Guwahati47Calcutta41Agra35Allahabad32Karnataka27Ranchi26Telangana19Patna18Jodhpur11Dehradun11SC11Varanasi11Jabalpur6Panaji5Punjab & Haryana2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Kerala1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Addition to Income5Section 250(6)4Disallowance4Section 143(1)3Section 80P3Section 270A3Section 1473Section 69C3Section 2502Section 143(3)

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI vs. M/S SOCIADADE DE FOMENTO INDUSTRIAL P. LTD, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 116/PAN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Nishant Thakkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

6. A perusal of the above rule shows that for the purpose of calculation of disallowance under this rule, the value of investments not only income from which "does not" but also "shall not" part of the total income are to be considered. While dealing with an identical issue, the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case

SOCIEADADE DE FOMENTO INDL. PVT. LTD.,MARGAO vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MARGAO RANGE, MARGAO

2
Capital Gains2
Short Term Capital Gains2

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 105/PAN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Nishant Thakkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

6. A perusal of the above rule shows that for the purpose of calculation of disallowance under this rule, the value of investments not only income from which "does not" but also "shall not" part of the total income are to be considered. While dealing with an identical issue, the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), BELAGAVI vs. SH. GIRISH PRAKASH VERNEKAR, BELAGAVI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection

ITA 228/PAN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji19 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Y. V. Raviraj
Section 132Section 147Section 69C

133[6] or Summons U/S 131 was issued to Rajesh Exports. Simultaneously appellant also by RPAD letter dated 9-12- 2016 requested Rajesh Exports to furnish the details in respect of alleged Cash Sales of Rs.4,37,07,261/-. However, there was absolutely no response from Rajesh Exports. However, assessments for all the years were finalized by the assessing Officer

HERALD PUBLICATIONS PVT. LTD,PANAJI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

ITA 160/PAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji19 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 160/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Herald Publication Pvt. Ltd. Ag-6, Campal Trade Centre, Opp. Taj Vivanta, H/H Mili, Panaji, Goa-403001 Pan : Aaach4580K . . . . . . . Appellant V/S National Faceless E-Asstt. Centre, Delhi. . . . . . . . Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr Sanket Deshmukh [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 147Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 270ASection 371(1)Section 43B

disallowance & determination of income u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, a penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act were initiated. The assessee choose to remain silent. In the absence of rebuttal, the penalty proceeding ceased by imposing penalty equal to 50% of tax sought to have evaded by an order dt. 26/09/2023 u/s 270A of the Act. Aggrieved assessee

THE SANKHLI URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,SANKHLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(4), PANAJI

ITA 58/PAN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji09 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 058/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr Amol Arlekar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Narendra Reddy [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 40Section 80P

disallowance of ₹51,56,366/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act and income brought to tax u/h income from other sources of ₹3,39,677/-. ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 4 The Sankhali Urban Co-op. Credit Society Ltd. Vs ITO ITA Nos.058/PAN/2025 AY: 2014-15 3. Aggrieved assessee re-attempted to resolve the dispute in appeal before