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”+ Section 133Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai970Delhi678Bangalore299Kolkata231Jaipur212Chennai211Hyderabad129Ahmedabad95Rajkot85Pune76Indore53Chandigarh53Visakhapatnam49Guwahati36Surat36Nagpur28Amritsar26Raipur24Lucknow23Ranchi20Jodhpur16Agra16Karnataka14Panaji12Cuttack8Patna8Allahabad6Cochin6Varanasi6Kerala5SC5Calcutta2Telangana2Dehradun2Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Addition to Income8Section 40A(3)6Section 133A5Survey u/s 133A5Section 153C4Section 1534Section 2634Disallowance4Section 143(3)3Section 153A

ITO, WARD-2(1), BEGUSARAI, BEGUSARAI vs. MANISH KUMAR MOTANI, KHAGARIA, BIHAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and CO of the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 442/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Ito, Ward 2(1), Begusarai Manish Kumar Motani, 3Rd Floor, G.S. Motors Building, Manish Kumar Motani, Hanuman Har Har Mahadev Chauk, Traders, Mill Road, Khagaria, Vs. Begusarai-851101, Begusarai, Khagaria, Bihari-851204 Bihar-851101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ajjpm4263D Co No. 02/Pat/2025 (Arising In Ita No. 442/Pat/2024 For A.Y. 2017-18) Ito, Ward 2(1), Begusarai Manish Kumar Motani, 3Rd Floor, G.S. Motors Building, Manish Kumar Motani, Hanuman Har Har Mahadev Chauk, Traders, Mill Road, Khagaria, Vs. Begusarai-851101, Begusarai, Khagaria, Bihari-851204 Bihar-851101 (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri A.K. Rastogi, S.K. Duta, Ars Revenue By : Shri A.H. Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.02.2026

For Appellant: S/Shri A.K. RastogiFor Respondent: Shri A.H. Chowdhary, DR
Section 133ASection 40A(3)

disallowance is warranted as the learned Assessing Officer did not record any reasons to doubt the genuineness of the expenses claimed. 7. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that in this case the survey was conducted under Section 133A

3
Unexplained Cash Credit3
Condonation of Delay3

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA vs. BROADSON COMMODITIES PVT LTD, DHANBAD

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 62/PAT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 153Section 153C

133A of the Income Tax Act were conducted at various premises of Subhash Prasad Yadav Group of cases on 23.02.2018. In order to give a logical end to the search proceeding, the case of the assessee was centralized with ACIT, Central Circle-3, Patna and it has not been disputed by the assessee. A notice under section 153A

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA vs. BROADSON COMMODITIES PVT LTD, DHANBAD

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 63/PAT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 153Section 153C

133A of the Income Tax Act were conducted at various premises of Subhash Prasad Yadav Group of cases on 23.02.2018. In order to give a logical end to the search proceeding, the case of the assessee was centralized with ACIT, Central Circle-3, Patna and it has not been disputed by the assessee. A notice under section 153A

LAL BABU PRASAD,SIWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 317/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)

Section 133ASection 250Section 43B

133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was conducted at the business premises of the assessee. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. On the basis of the submissions made by the assessee, a discrepancy in stock was identified at ₹3,25,06,633. After deducting

SAJJAN BAJAJ vs. PR. C. I. T.,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 53/PAT/2016[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Patna05 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

133A was conducted in the business premises of the assessee on 01.03.2011. The assessee has filed return of his income on 31.03.2012 disclosing total income of Rs.3,43,140/-. The ld. Assessing Officer has passed an assessment order under section 143(3) on 10.01.2014. The books of accounts of the assessee were rejected. An addition of Rs.16

ANUP KUMAR HUF,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENT. CIR-1, PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 192/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 192/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Anup Kumar Huf,…………………...….………Appellant 4A, Narayan Nilayam Apartment, Road No. 6 Rajendra Nagar, Patna-800016 Bihar [Pan:Aahha5422R] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax....Respondent Central Circle-1, Patna

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 246Section 251Section 5

133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were carried out at the business premises of M/s. Sona Gold Agrochem Pvt. Ltd., Patna. The group consisted of a number of companies which are in the business of manufacturer of poultry feed and rice. The group of concerns are owned and managed by the Kasera Family of Patna, in particular, by Shri

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA, PATNA vs. RADHA MOHAN ROY, PURNEA

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

ITA 264/PAT/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna28 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna Radha Mohan Roy, 6Th Floor, Room No.602 Mohan Nivas At Chopra Bazar, Central Revenue Building Ramnagar, Farshi Banmanki, Vs. (Annexe), Beer Chand Patel Purnea, Bihari-854102 Marg, Patna, Bihar-800001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Buzpr3181H Co No. 03/Pat/2025 (Arising In Ita No. 264/Pat/2025 For A.Y. 2019-20) Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna Radha Mohan Roy, 6Th Floor, Room No.602 Mohan Nivas At Chopra Bazar, Central Revenue Building Ramnagar, Farshi Banmanki, Vs. (Annexe), Beer Chand Patel Purnea, Bihari-854102 Marg, Patna, Bihar-800001 (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri A.K. Rastogi, Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Md. Ah Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.11.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am:

For Appellant: S/Shri A.K. RastogiFor Respondent: Shri Md. AH Chowdhary, DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69C

133A of the Act were conducted in various premises including the residential premises of Manoj Kumar Group. The notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued on 28.11.2021, and assessee did not make any compliance. The assessee filed the return of income on 21.03.2022, declaring total income of ₹47,06,990/-. We note that during the course of search

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA vs. RISHAV DUTTA, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 51/PAT/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna06 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri M. Kr. Mashi, CA
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 80C

disallowance of Rs. 1 50,000/- claimed by the assessee u/s 80C of the I. T. Act:- 2 Rishav Dutta, AY: 2017-18 (a) by admitting fresh evidences/documents such as paper book containing books of account and other documents produced before him without providing reasonable opportunity to the A.O. to examine such evidences in violation of Rule