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.

70 results for “disallowance”+ Section 143(1)(ii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai9,137Delhi6,655Kolkata2,386Bangalore2,356Chennai1,919Ahmedabad1,044Jaipur887Pune850Hyderabad823Indore662Surat581Chandigarh463Raipur391Rajkot321Amritsar293Visakhapatnam277Cochin248Karnataka248Nagpur223Lucknow222Cuttack129Panaji129Agra115Guwahati101Allahabad81Jodhpur75Patna70Telangana68Calcutta65Dehradun57Ranchi56SC38Varanasi38Kerala19Jabalpur16Punjab & Haryana14Himachal Pradesh3Orissa3Rajasthan3Gauhati2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)63Section 25053Section 80I44Addition to Income43Section 26342Section 153A26Deduction23Section 14719Disallowance18Section 132

SIS CASH SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. ADIT, CPC, BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 240/PAT/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 May 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Kavita Jha, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

ii) The adjustments made to the order u/s.143(1) through rectification u/s. 154 of the Act, is beyond the scope of section 143(1), since only prima facie adjustments are permitted thereon, and certainly not adjustments which pertain to debatable issues. The Ld. AR relied on the case of Kvaverner John Brown Engg. (India) P. ltd. Vs. ACIT

Showing 1–20 of 70 · Page 1 of 4

17
Section 143(2)14
Survey u/s 133A13

PUNRASAR JUTE PARK LIMITED,PURNEA vs. CIT, PURNEA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 432/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna05 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

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

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 142(2)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, and (b) unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of the failure on the part of the assessee : (i) to make a return under section 139 or in response to a notice issued under sub-section (1) of section

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN.LTD.,PATNA vs. CIT (APPEAL), DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 335/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 80I

II. ITA No. 331/PAT/2024; AY 2013-14: “1. For that the grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other. 2. For that the appellate order dated 25/01/2024 bearing DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060138818(1) passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) for Assessment Year 2013-14 by the Ld. First Appellate Authority

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN. LTD.,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 332/PAT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 80I

II. ITA No. 331/PAT/2024; AY 2013-14: “1. For that the grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other. 2. For that the appellate order dated 25/01/2024 bearing DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060138818(1) passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) for Assessment Year 2013-14 by the Ld. First Appellate Authority

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIR-2, P)ATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 333/PAT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 80I

II. ITA No. 331/PAT/2024; AY 2013-14: “1. For that the grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other. 2. For that the appellate order dated 25/01/2024 bearing DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060138818(1) passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) for Assessment Year 2013-14 by the Ld. First Appellate Authority

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN. LTD.,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 331/PAT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 80I

II. ITA No. 331/PAT/2024; AY 2013-14: “1. For that the grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other. 2. For that the appellate order dated 25/01/2024 bearing DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060138818(1) passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) for Assessment Year 2013-14 by the Ld. First Appellate Authority

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, COR-2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 334/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 80I

II. ITA No. 331/PAT/2024; AY 2013-14: “1. For that the grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other. 2. For that the appellate order dated 25/01/2024 bearing DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060138818(1) passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) for Assessment Year 2013-14 by the Ld. First Appellate Authority

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,PATNA vs. ITO WARD 2(1) PATNA, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 330/PAT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 80I

II. ITA No. 331/PAT/2024; AY 2013-14: “1. For that the grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other. 2. For that the appellate order dated 25/01/2024 bearing DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060138818(1) passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) for Assessment Year 2013-14 by the Ld. First Appellate Authority

GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LTD,PATNA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 360/PAT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

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

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

ii) Closely examine the seized material; (iii) Consider the provisions of Section 142(2A). . (28) For that the Ld. Pr.CIT has failed to appreciate that re-examination of the issue already concluded vide order u/s 143(3) dated 31/03/2022 would amount to review of the said order which is not permissible in the eyes of law. (29) For that whole

GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 358/PAT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

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

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

ii) Closely examine the seized material; (iii) Consider the provisions of Section 142(2A). . (28) For that the Ld. Pr.CIT has failed to appreciate that re-examination of the issue already concluded vide order u/s 143(3) dated 31/03/2022 would amount to review of the said order which is not permissible in the eyes of law. (29) For that whole

GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL , PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 356/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

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

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

ii) Closely examine the seized material; (iii) Consider the provisions of Section 142(2A). . (28) For that the Ld. Pr.CIT has failed to appreciate that re-examination of the issue already concluded vide order u/s 143(3) dated 31/03/2022 would amount to review of the said order which is not permissible in the eyes of law. (29) For that whole

GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD,PATNA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 357/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

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

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

ii) Closely examine the seized material; (iii) Consider the provisions of Section 142(2A). . (28) For that the Ld. Pr.CIT has failed to appreciate that re-examination of the issue already concluded vide order u/s 143(3) dated 31/03/2022 would amount to review of the said order which is not permissible in the eyes of law. (29) For that whole

GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 359/PAT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

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

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

ii) Closely examine the seized material; (iii) Consider the provisions of Section 142(2A). . (28) For that the Ld. Pr.CIT has failed to appreciate that re-examination of the issue already concluded vide order u/s 143(3) dated 31/03/2022 would amount to review of the said order which is not permissible in the eyes of law. (29) For that whole

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

143(2) and 142(1) in both the years. In A.Y. 2016-17, ld. Assessing Officer has observed that a perusal of the books of assessee, it revealed that it had shown a loan received from M/s. Trailblazer Edusol (P) Limited amounting to Rs.2,00,04,931/-. The ld. Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee could

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

143(2) and 142(1) in both the years. In A.Y. 2016-17, ld. Assessing Officer has observed that a perusal of the books of assessee, it revealed that it had shown a loan received from M/s. Trailblazer Edusol (P) Limited amounting to Rs.2,00,04,931/-. The ld. Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee could

DCIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA vs. KUMAR ARUNODAYA, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 89/PAT/2020[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Patna07 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 23

143(2) of the Act which were also referred by the Ld. CIT(A). Considering the ratio laid down in the above decisions, we hold that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly allowed the appeal of the assessee on legal issue. Accordingly we uphold the order of Ld. CIT(A) by dismissing the appeal of the revenue. 18. Insofar

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. KUMAR ARUNODAYA, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 98/PAT/2021[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Patna07 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 23

143(2) of the Act which were also referred by the Ld. CIT(A). Considering the ratio laid down in the above decisions, we hold that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly allowed the appeal of the assessee on legal issue. Accordingly we uphold the order of Ld. CIT(A) by dismissing the appeal of the revenue. 18. Insofar

KUMAR ARUNODAYA,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 6, PATNA [NEW – DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2, PATNA], PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 96/PAT/2021[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Patna07 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 23

143(2) of the Act which were also referred by the Ld. CIT(A). Considering the ratio laid down in the above decisions, we hold that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly allowed the appeal of the assessee on legal issue. Accordingly we uphold the order of Ld. CIT(A) by dismissing the appeal of the revenue. 18. Insofar

KUMAR ARUNOSAYA,PATNA vs. A.O., CIRCLE-6, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 33/PAT/2020[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Patna07 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 23

143(2) of the Act which were also referred by the Ld. CIT(A). Considering the ratio laid down in the above decisions, we hold that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly allowed the appeal of the assessee on legal issue. Accordingly we uphold the order of Ld. CIT(A) by dismissing the appeal of the revenue. 18. Insofar

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA vs. KUMAR ARUNODAYA, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 94/PAT/2020[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Patna07 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 23

143(2) of the Act which were also referred by the Ld. CIT(A). Considering the ratio laid down in the above decisions, we hold that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly allowed the appeal of the assessee on legal issue. Accordingly we uphold the order of Ld. CIT(A) by dismissing the appeal of the revenue. 18. Insofar