Search: disallowance | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

6 results for “disallowance”+ Section 1aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai933 Delhi917 Bangalore517 Chennai351 Kolkata208 Ahmedabad167 Jaipur144 Hyderabad138 Pune115 Raipur95 Cochin68 Karnataka54 Indore54 Chandigarh53 Surat43 Cuttack30 Nagpur29 Rajkot26 Panaji25 SC20 Visakhapatnam20 Jodhpur19 Lucknow18 Guwahati14 Ranchi12 Telangana10 Jabalpur10 Agra8 Patna6 Varanasi6 Amritsar5 Dehradun3 Kerala2 Punjab & Haryana2 Allahabad2 Orissa1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 26325 Section 143(3)15 Section 142(1)6 Section 133(6)5 Section 153C5 Natural Justice5 Section 2512

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

section 271AB(1a) of the Act. Ld. Assessing Officer has also disallowed the claim of deduction made under section 80IA

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: Disposed

ITAT Patna

16 Oct 2024

AY 2019-20

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

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

section 271AB(1a) of the Act. Ld. Assessing Officer has also disallowed the claim of deduction made under section 80IA

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

section 271AB(1a) of the Act. Ld. Assessing Officer has also disallowed the claim of deduction made under section 80IA

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

section 271AB(1a) of the Act. Ld. Assessing Officer has also disallowed the claim of deduction made under section 80IA

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

section 271AB(1a) of the Act. Ld. Assessing Officer has also disallowed the claim of deduction made under section 80IA

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

disallowed Rs.15,11,000/- and added back to the total income of the assessee as undisclosed income from other sources of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and determined the total taxable income of the assessee at Rs,27,00,410/-. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 5. The assessee