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.

4 results for “disallowance”+ Section 271(1)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,268Delhi2,116Ahmedabad760Bangalore535Chennai460Jaipur441Kolkata365Indore249Pune246Hyderabad224Surat213Chandigarh94Raipur86Rajkot86Nagpur74Visakhapatnam69Lucknow63Cuttack62Cochin61Allahabad49Calcutta37Agra31Guwahati30Ranchi30Amritsar25Karnataka23Panaji22SC21Varanasi16Jabalpur12Jodhpur10Telangana8Dehradun6Patna4Punjab & Haryana2Rajasthan2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Disallowance4Addition to Income4Section 250(6)2Section 234A2Section 271(1)(c)2Natural Justice2Limitation/Time-bar2

I.T.O. vs. M/S KUMAR CONSTRUCLTION,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 10/PAT/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(b)Section 40A(3)

D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna dated 28.01.2015 passed for A.Y. 2009-10. 1 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 M/s. Kumar Construction 2. Grounds No. 1, 2 & 3 are inter-connected grounds therefore we first take these grounds

RUSHATAM KHAN,PURNEA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, PURNEA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2013-

ITA 328/PAT/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Patna22 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c) based on the order passed initiated by the Ld. Officer is wholly misconceived, arbitrary, unjustifiable and illegal. 9. For that the CIT (Appeal) erred in passing ex-parte order by not following principal of natural justice and the Ld. assessing officer also erred in passing order by not following principal of natural justice. 10. For that

RUSHATAM KHAN,PURNEA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, PURNEA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2013-

ITA 329/PAT/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Patna22 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c) based on the order passed initiated by the Ld. Officer is wholly misconceived, arbitrary, unjustifiable and illegal. 9. For that the CIT (Appeal) erred in passing ex-parte order by not following principal of natural justice and the Ld. assessing officer also erred in passing order by not following principal of natural justice. 10. For that

ITO, WARD-4(1), PATNA vs. HEMANT KUMAR DAS, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 97/PAT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna28 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

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

Section 143(3)

D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The Revenue and assessee are in cross appeals against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna-2 dated 18.09.2020 passed for assessment year 2011-12. 2. First we take the appeal of the Revenue. The Revenue has taken five grounds of appeal, which revolve around two issues, namely