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 40A(7)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,157Delhi1,117Bangalore443Pune431Chennai426Kolkata399Ahmedabad328Hyderabad210Jaipur198Raipur136Chandigarh103Surat97Indore96Amritsar86Visakhapatnam84Cuttack55Cochin52Nagpur40Rajkot39Lucknow35Allahabad26Jodhpur23Agra23Karnataka16Guwahati13SC10Patna8Varanasi7Ranchi7Calcutta5Dehradun5Punjab & Haryana2Kerala2Panaji2Jabalpur2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 1548Addition to Income7Section 143(3)6Section 1476Section 40A(3)5Section 2505Disallowance5Deduction4Section 143(2)2Section 142(1)

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 40A(3)Section 69

7. In the meanwhile, the income tax department also preferred an appeal before ITAT-Patna on 02.02.2024, against the partial relief order of CIT-A and the issue raised was deletion of disallowance u/s 40A(3) of Rs.3,52,82,071/-. The present appeal is ITA NO: ITA 239/PAT/2024 fixed for hearing on 30.06.2025 as above.” 4. Subsequent

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

2
Section 2632
Natural Justice2

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)

section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance of the notices at the end of the assessee. Ultimately the ld. Assessing Officer gone through the books of account submitted before her and made these two additions by recording the following finding:- “Addition u/s 40A(3) for payments exceeding Rs.20,000/- through bearer cheques:- On perusal of Books

DIVYA PRAKASH,BHOJPUR vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 24/PAT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)Section 80C

40A(3). 5 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Divya Prakash 7. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Before we embark upon an enquiry on the facts and issues agitated before us to find out whether the action u/s 263 of the Act, deserves to be taken against the assessee or not, it is pertinent

RAVI LOCHAN SINGH,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PATNA

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

ITA 124/PAT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 250Section 32Section 32(1)

B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, section 40(a)(ia) is attracted here also. Hence, It is my opinion that the assessee has claimed Rs. 18,91,877/- under the head of advertisement but he has not deducted TDS on the payments. Therefore, the AO proceeded to make disallowance

AJAY KUMAR GHOSH,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1/PAT/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 40A(3)

disallowed u/s 40A(3). In this case you had paid Rs.4,97,700/- to Subodh Kumar and Rs.95,000/- to Kanchan Ghosh for labour payment but TDS not deducted on it. Hence, the same is required to be added back to total income of the assessee”. 4. The ld. Assessing Officer has observed that the assessee did not appear

THE SIWAN CENTRAL CO.-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,SIWAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, MUZAFFARPUR

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

ITA 30/PAT/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 147Section 250Section 36Section 40aSection 43D

B] Vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Muzaffarpur..................................Respondent Appearances by: Sh. A.K. Rastogi, Sr. Adv. & Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Adv., appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Sh. Saumyajit Das Gupta, CIT D/R, appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : August 30th, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : September 20th, 2022 I.T.A. Nos.: 29 & 30/Pat/2019 Assessment Years

THE SIWAN CENTRAL CO.-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,SIWAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, MUZAFFARPUR

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

ITA 29/PAT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 147Section 250Section 36Section 40aSection 43D

B] Vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Muzaffarpur..................................Respondent Appearances by: Sh. A.K. Rastogi, Sr. Adv. & Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Adv., appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Sh. Saumyajit Das Gupta, CIT D/R, appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : August 30th, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : September 20th, 2022 I.T.A. Nos.: 29 & 30/Pat/2019 Assessment Years

MAHENDRA PRASAD,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, ITD, DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 717/PAT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Patna20 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 24Section 250Section 80C

40A(3) of the Act could be verified. However, after being given repeated opportunities as mentioned above, the assessee did not submit any such details. Therefore, the books of account of the assessee were rejected as per the provisions of section 145(3) of the Act and since the expenses could not be verified due to failure of the assessee