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 260Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi967Mumbai363Karnataka310Calcutta190Chennai138Bangalore110Kolkata103Telangana100Amritsar48Jaipur36Kerala34Hyderabad32Indore27Nagpur25SC20Punjab & Haryana18Ahmedabad17Lucknow16Chandigarh16Raipur10Pune9Surat9Cochin8Orissa5Allahabad3Dehradun2Cuttack2Panaji2Visakhapatnam1Agra1Andhra Pradesh1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Gauhati1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Jodhpur1Rajasthan1Tripura1Varanasi1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 804Section 80H3Deduction2

GOA CARBON LTD.,PANAJI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1 (1), PANAJI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 333/PAN/2018[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji17 Aug 2022AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 260ASection 80Section 80H

260A wherein following questions of law have been framed: (i) Whether the income earned by the Appellant from leasing its plant and machinery in course of its business activity of leasing is in the nature of rent as contemplated under Explanation (baa) to Section 80 HHC of the Act? ii) Whether the income earned by leasing plant and machinery

BELLAD BAGEWADI KRISHNI SEVA SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,BELGAUM vs. ITO (WARD) 1(3),, BELGAUM

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 260/PAN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Praveen P GhaliFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikant
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"). 2. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 3. Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance that both lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in denying it section 80P(2)(a)(i) deduction of Rs.25,01,300/- in issue, the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion