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.

39 results for “disallowance”+ Section 65clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,044Delhi3,482Bangalore1,259Chennai1,160Kolkata933Ahmedabad879Pune619Hyderabad616Jaipur563Indore375Chandigarh336Surat229Cochin167Visakhapatnam153Raipur145Cuttack133Rajkot111Nagpur107Lucknow105Amritsar79Karnataka75Ranchi65Guwahati55Jodhpur52Allahabad49Calcutta46Patna39Agra32SC29Telangana20Jabalpur18Panaji17Varanasi17Dehradun15Punjab & Haryana8Rajasthan4Kerala3Himachal Pradesh2Orissa2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 25034Addition to Income34Section 153A26Section 13216Disallowance13Section 43B12Section 143(2)11Section 14711Survey u/s 133A10Section 271(1)(b)

PAVAN KUMAR BHAGAT,SAHARSA vs. ITO, WARD-3(4), SAHARSA, SAHARA

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

ITA 281/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna02 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 37Section 69A

disallowing and adding Rs.11,65,739 claimed as commission expenses by the appellant, solely on the ground that the said deduction is not allowable in view of violation of provision of section

Showing 1–20 of 39 · Page 1 of 2

9
Section 271(1)(c)8
Natural Justice8

M/S MANISH FINLEASE (P) LTD,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), PATNA

ITA 25/PAT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 68

65,00,000/- as unexplained credit u/s.68 of the I.T.Act, 1961 and made addition into the total income of the assessee. P a g e 6 | 71 Assessment Year : 2010 -2011 5. Feeling aggrieved from the order of AO, the assessee appealed before the ld. CIT(A). In the Form 35, the assessee challenged to the reopening of the case

ACIT vs. M/S CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,

In the result, the appeals of the department as well as the Cross

ITA 28/PAT/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Amit Shukla, Jm Ita No. 28/Pat./2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 29/Pat./2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Tax, Circle-1, Tapeshwar Bhawan, Mangal Pandey Patna Path, Ara, Bhojpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabtc0114A

For Appellant: Sh. A. K. Rastogi & Sh. Rakesh KumarFor Respondent: Sh. Kaushik Kumar Das, Sr. DR
Section 194H

disallowance of Rs.45,65,546/- made by the AO on account of non- deduction of TDS under the provisions of Section

ACIT, PATNA vs. CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,

In the result, the appeals of the department as well as the Cross

ITA 29/PAT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Amit Shukla, Jm Ita No. 28/Pat./2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 29/Pat./2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Tax, Circle-1, Tapeshwar Bhawan, Mangal Pandey Patna Path, Ara, Bhojpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabtc0114A

For Appellant: Sh. A. K. Rastogi & Sh. Rakesh KumarFor Respondent: Sh. Kaushik Kumar Das, Sr. DR
Section 194H

disallowance of Rs.45,65,546/- made by the AO on account of non- deduction of TDS under the provisions of Section

UTTAR BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,MUZAFFARPUR vs. DC/AC CIRCLE-2, MUZAFFARPUR

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

ITA 186/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Patna23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.186/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank……….....…..…………………....Appellant Sharma Complex, Ramna Kalambagh Chowk, Muzaffarpur, Bihar – 842002. [Pan: Aaaju0238J] Vs. Dc/Ac, Circle-2, Muzaffarpur.……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rajat Datta, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 22, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 23, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna ["Cit(A)"] For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring A Total Loss Of Rs.47,24,77,982. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Compulsory Manual Selection Criteria During The Financial Year 2017-18. Accordingly, Statutory Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") Were Issued & Duly Served Upon The Assessee. In Response, The Assessee Appeared & Made Certain Submissions. However, The Assessing Officer Made The Following Additions/Disallowances: Rs.16,84,20,016: Provision For Npa.

Section 36(1)(va)

section 36(1)(va) as not deposited before the due date. After the above disallowances, the total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.1,43,94,65

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

ITA 22/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

65,122/-and allow Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee. 25. Next issue for our consideration is disallowance of expenditure at Rs.28,317/-. We find that the disallowance has been made by the Id. Assessing Officer apply and provisions of section

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

ITA 23/PAT/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

65,122/-and allow Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee. 25. Next issue for our consideration is disallowance of expenditure at Rs.28,317/-. We find that the disallowance has been made by the Id. Assessing Officer apply and provisions of section

UDAY SHANKAR ARUN,GAYA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

ITA 25/PAT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

65,122/-and allow Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee. 25. Next issue for our consideration is disallowance of expenditure at Rs.28,317/-. We find that the disallowance has been made by the Id. Assessing Officer apply and provisions of section

UDAY SHANKAR ARUN,GAYA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

ITA 26/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

65,122/-and allow Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee. 25. Next issue for our consideration is disallowance of expenditure at Rs.28,317/-. We find that the disallowance has been made by the Id. Assessing Officer apply and provisions of section

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

ITA 17/PAT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

65,122/-and allow Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee. 25. Next issue for our consideration is disallowance of expenditure at Rs.28,317/-. We find that the disallowance has been made by the Id. Assessing Officer apply and provisions of section

UDAY SHANKAR ARUN,GAYA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

ITA 27/PAT/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

65,122/-and allow Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee. 25. Next issue for our consideration is disallowance of expenditure at Rs.28,317/-. We find that the disallowance has been made by the Id. Assessing Officer apply and provisions of section

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

ITA 18/PAT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

65,122/-and allow Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee. 25. Next issue for our consideration is disallowance of expenditure at Rs.28,317/-. We find that the disallowance has been made by the Id. Assessing Officer apply and provisions of section

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

ITA 19/PAT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

65,122/-and allow Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee. 25. Next issue for our consideration is disallowance of expenditure at Rs.28,317/-. We find that the disallowance has been made by the Id. Assessing Officer apply and provisions of section

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

ITA 20/PAT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

65,122/-and allow Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee. 25. Next issue for our consideration is disallowance of expenditure at Rs.28,317/-. We find that the disallowance has been made by the Id. Assessing Officer apply and provisions of section

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

ITA 21/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

65,122/-and allow Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee. 25. Next issue for our consideration is disallowance of expenditure at Rs.28,317/-. We find that the disallowance has been made by the Id. Assessing Officer apply and provisions of section

ZAIMUR RAHMAN,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 321/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 250Section 68Section 69A

65,000) was disallowed and added to the total income of the appellant as income from other sources. 12. For that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as the ld. assessing officer, without giving any opportunity, much less sufficient opportunity, has erred in holding that the appellant had sold immovable property for Rs.33,20,000 and taxed

SANJAY YADAV,JAHANABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 217/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

disallowance. Another sum of ₹ 6,60,000/- on account of rent was also examined and after issuing a show cause notice and on considering the fact that the assessee did not respond to the notice issued, the Ld. AO added a sum of ₹ 19,25,091/- and the total income was assessed at ₹ 24,65,123/-. Aggrieved with the assessment

SANJAY YADAV,JAHANABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 218/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

disallowance. Another sum of ₹ 6,60,000/- on account of rent was also examined and after issuing a show cause notice and on considering the fact that the assessee did not respond to the notice issued, the Ld. AO added a sum of ₹ 19,25,091/- and the total income was assessed at ₹ 24,65,123/-. Aggrieved with the assessment

SANJAY YADAV,JAHANABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 216/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

disallowance. Another sum of ₹ 6,60,000/- on account of rent was also examined and after issuing a show cause notice and on considering the fact that the assessee did not respond to the notice issued, the Ld. AO added a sum of ₹ 19,25,091/- and the total income was assessed at ₹ 24,65,123/-. Aggrieved with the assessment

ITO, WARD-2(1), BEGUSARAI vs. SMT. SATAYABATI DEVI, KHAGARIA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the Cross Objection by the assessee both are dismissed

ITA 87/PAT/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(3)

65,430/- and to observe that the amount represents expenses on account of license fees which is part of trading account, thus ignoring the fact that AO has not disallowed as such but has added the mount because of having been paid towards this expense out of undisclosed sources of income. (iii) Any other grounds that may be urged