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.

11 results for “disallowance”+ Section 40A(9)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,341Mumbai1,277Chennai559Kolkata500Bangalore491Ahmedabad166Pune142Jaipur133Hyderabad132Raipur123Surat93Indore84Amritsar79Chandigarh57Visakhapatnam43Cuttack42Nagpur42Rajkot41Cochin30Lucknow28Karnataka24Agra24Allahabad22Jodhpur18Guwahati13Dehradun12Patna11SC10Varanasi8Calcutta5Ranchi5Jabalpur2Punjab & Haryana2Telangana2Kerala1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 40A(3)12Addition to Income9Section 1548Disallowance8Section 143(3)7Deduction7Section 2506Section 1476Section 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

section 40A(3) disallowance. 7. The invocation of Sec. 40A(3) as well as estimating a net profit @5.39% of the estimated out of books turnover shall not go hands in hand as it will lead to double taxation of the same income. Once the net income rate is applied, obviously the income determined takes care of all the provisions

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

2
Section 2632
TDS2

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)

disallowances made by the A.O. u/s 40A(3) and section 40(a)(ia) are hereby deleted and income is estimated at the end of discussion of all other grounds of appeal”. 6. The ld. Sr. D.R. took us through the assessment order. He submitted that perusal of section 40A(3) would indicate that any assessee incurring expenditure exceeding Rs.20

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)

40A(3) of Rs. 8,02,45,293/- is set aside and GP addition of Rs. 27,15,992/- as discussed above is made to the total income of the appellant. Hence, ground no. 1 is partly allowed.” 6.1. Similarly, the learned CIT (A) in respect of the second addition of Rs. 16,88,598.67 allowed the appeal

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)

9,05,981/- is liable to be confirmed. Ground-9 regarding commission paid of Rs.11,41,679/- u/s 194H the A.O has made the addition amount of Rs. 11,41,679/- with stating that assessee missed to deduct tax on payment on commission on amounting of Rs. 11,41,679/- made to resident Indian since the assessee has again violating

JANARDAN PRASAD,PATNA vs. CIT (A), PATNA

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

ITA 371/PAT/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT
Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

section 40A(3) of the Act could not be applied on the limited issue of disallowance as the assessee could not be expected to do an act which was impermissible in law. It was also the submission that the total purchase of the assessee was to an extent of Rs.7,77,93,578/- and the gross profit declared

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)

disallowance under section 40A(3) could be made or not. It requires evidence as to how payments in cash were made by the assessee. Similarly the other item could not be completed without an inquiry. Such type of addition cannot be made after scrutiny assessment by way of 154 rectification order. On the simple reason, this order

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

disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. Under the facts and circumstances, his total income Is assessed u/s 143(3) of the. Income Tax Act at total income of Rs.7,47,137/-. Allowed deduction u/s 80C of Rs.21000/- of the Act. Issue demand notice and challan accordingly”. 4. The ld. Principal Commissioner perused the assessment record

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA vs. BIHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, MUNGER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 257/PAT/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(viia)

section 40A, 43B etc. and that all the 6 AY: 2012-13 Bihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank inadmissible amounts had already been added back in the computation of income. He further drew attention to the observation made by the AO at page 8 of the assessment order that there is no unreasonable increase in operative expenses as compared to earlier year

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

disallowing Rs. 1,40,675/- u/s 40a(ia) for non deduction of tax on expenses under the head advertisement and publicity. 8. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining addition of Rs. 3,68,41,943/-on account of provisions made for various items listed at 2nd page of the impugned order. 9. For that

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

disallowing Rs. 1,40,675/- u/s 40a(ia) for non deduction of tax on expenses under the head advertisement and publicity. 8. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining addition of Rs. 3,68,41,943/-on account of provisions made for various items listed at 2nd page of the impugned order. 9. For that

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