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.

166 results for “disallowance”+ Section 4(3)(i)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai8,020Delhi7,741Chennai2,349Bangalore1,743Ahmedabad1,735Kolkata1,696Pune1,292Hyderabad1,261Jaipur1,150Cochin734Indore663Chandigarh659Surat652Raipur488Visakhapatnam462Rajkot447Nagpur370Lucknow327Amritsar287Cuttack243SC226Jodhpur206Panaji187Patna166Ranchi166Guwahati159Agra150Dehradun116Allahabad90Jabalpur84Varanasi28A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN7RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Addition to Income67Section 143(3)59Section 25057Section 26352Disallowance40Section 80I39Section 40A(3)33Section 153A33Section 143(2)30Section 154

PRASHANT PACKAGING PVT.LTD,PATNA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIR-2, PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 644/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Apr 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 43B

3) and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs. 4,13,63,240.00 which was subsequently confirmed by the order of Id. CIT(A). Now the issue for our consideration arises so as to whether the disallowance under section

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR, MUZAFFARPUR vs. AJIT KUMAR, BETTIAH

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 239/PAT/2024[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Sept 2025

Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Showing 1–20 of 166 · Page 1 of 9

...
27
Deduction26
Natural Justice14
Bench:
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 40A(3)Section 69

4. From the texts of section 40A(3) reproduced by the CIT-A, it is crystal clear that the business income of an assessee, which has to be determined applying section 28 to 43 of the ITA act, covers disallowance

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)

3) and 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. The ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in deleting both these additions by holding that books of account of the assessee are not reliable, therefore, instead of making specific disallowance under these sections, the profit of the assessee deserves to be estimated. 4

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

4. For that the order of assessment dated 21/11/2019 bearing DIN & Order No: NIL passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Patna is invalid in view of the fact that there was no DIN mentioned

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

4. For that the order of assessment dated 21/11/2019 bearing DIN & Order No: NIL passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Patna is invalid in view of the fact that there was no DIN mentioned

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

4. For that the order of assessment dated 21/11/2019 bearing DIN & Order No: NIL passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Patna is invalid in view of the fact that there was no DIN mentioned

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

4. For that the order of assessment dated 21/11/2019 bearing DIN & Order No: NIL passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Patna is invalid in view of the fact that there was no DIN mentioned

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

4. For that the order of assessment dated 21/11/2019 bearing DIN & Order No: NIL passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Patna is invalid in view of the fact that there was no DIN mentioned

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

4. For that the order of assessment dated 21/11/2019 bearing DIN & Order No: NIL passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Patna is invalid in view of the fact that there was no DIN mentioned

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

3 (Gujarat) wherein it was held that where AO issued a reopening notice against assessee on ground that deduction 15 Punrasar Jute Park Limited under section 80-IA(4)(iv) claimed and allowed on generation and sale of steam by assessee was to be disallowed

SANGAM ALMIRAH PRIVATE LIMITED,MUZAFFARPUR vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 338/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 250Section 270ASection 270A(9)

3. For that the penalty order nowhere specify as to how the addition can be considered as 'Misreporting' u/s 270A (9) and falls under which particular limb of the sub-section. 4. For that it is a matter on record that the appellant themselves brought the fact of incorrect claim of expenditure in P&L A/c and as such should

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)

4. The only issue raised by the Revenue in the various grounds of appeal is against the order of learned CIT (A) deleting the addition made by the learned Assessing Officer of ₹8,02,45,293/-, which was in violation to the Provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and not allowable as deduction

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

4,45, 12,849/- through no complete details and evidences w.r.t. the same have been provided by the assessee. However, the same vere not pressed by the Revenue as the legality of the assessee's claim itself remained unproved. 8. On the similar analogy, the claim of assessee u/s 54EC w.r.t. exemption of Rs. 50, 00, 000/- is also disallowed

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

4,45, 12,849/- through no complete details and evidences w.r.t. the same have been provided by the assessee. However, the same vere not pressed by the Revenue as the legality of the assessee's claim itself remained unproved. 8. On the similar analogy, the claim of assessee u/s 54EC w.r.t. exemption of Rs. 50, 00, 000/- is also disallowed

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

4,45, 12,849/- through no complete details and evidences w.r.t. the same have been provided by the assessee. However, the same vere not pressed by the Revenue as the legality of the assessee's claim itself remained unproved. 8. On the similar analogy, the claim of assessee u/s 54EC w.r.t. exemption of Rs. 50, 00, 000/- is also disallowed

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

4,45, 12,849/- through no complete details and evidences w.r.t. the same have been provided by the assessee. However, the same vere not pressed by the Revenue as the legality of the assessee's claim itself remained unproved. 8. On the similar analogy, the claim of assessee u/s 54EC w.r.t. exemption of Rs. 50, 00, 000/- is also disallowed

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

4,45, 12,849/- through no complete details and evidences w.r.t. the same have been provided by the assessee. However, the same vere not pressed by the Revenue as the legality of the assessee's claim itself remained unproved. 8. On the similar analogy, the claim of assessee u/s 54EC w.r.t. exemption of Rs. 50, 00, 000/- is also disallowed

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA vs. INDIA CARRIERS PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 86/PAT/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna13 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Rajesh Kumar

Section 40A(3)

4 I.T.A. No.: 86/PAT/2020 Assessment Year: 2016-17 India Carriers Pvt. Ltd. the contention of the appellant. The disallowance of Rs. 1,35,56,279/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act is therefore deleted.” 3. After hearing rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has given a very cogent finding that on each

S.RANJAN & BROTHERS,MUZAFFARPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 71/PAT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna14 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2017-18 S. Ranjan & Brothers Dcit, Circle-1, Muzaffarpur Puja Bazar, Motijheel, Muzaffarpur- Vs 842001. Pan: Aaofs 8056 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, Jcit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.05.2024 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.08.2021 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’].

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, JCIT, DR
Section 143(2)Section 40A(3)

disallowance u/s 40A(3) cannot be made. Moreover, the alleged payments for the materials purchased were capitalize and depreciation was claimed on capital assets purchased by the assessee. Therefore, the application of section 40A(3) is not attract in the case of assessee. 6. On the other hand ld. DR supported the confirmation of addition made

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

4-12-2015] “5.4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has further submitted that the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 153C was passed after getting approval of Addl. CIT under section 153D of the I.T. Act and therefore such an assessment cannot be revised without revising the directions of the Addl. CIT under section 153D