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.

24 results for “disallowance”+ Section 69clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,187Delhi3,659Bangalore1,176Chennai1,110Kolkata1,043Ahmedabad919Hyderabad693Jaipur676Pune653Indore433Chandigarh367Surat262Cochin190Raipur185Visakhapatnam175Amritsar172Cuttack158Nagpur156Rajkot139Lucknow83Ranchi69Karnataka63Guwahati61Allahabad51Jodhpur48Agra43Calcutta42Dehradun32Patna24Telangana23SC21Varanasi14Panaji12Jabalpur9Kerala6Punjab & Haryana4Rajasthan2Andhra Pradesh1Himachal Pradesh1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 25029Section 143(3)21Section 14718Addition to Income15Deduction14Disallowance11Section 1548Section 578Section 687TDS

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)

disallowance under these sections, the profit of the assessee deserves to be estimated. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a firm derives income as a civil contractor. It has filed its return of income on 12.10.2009 showing total income of Rs.36,09,014/- on a total turnover of Rs.9,71,11,489/-. The case

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

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

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

7
Section 376
Section 80I6
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) are not applicable. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)-3, Patna erred in not Including the Issue In the remand order Issued by him for examination of the undisclosed receipt from business of the assessee. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances

WASEEM ALAM,WEST CHAMPARAN vs. ITO, NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

ITA 17/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.17/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Waseem Alam…...………………….....…..…………………....Appellant Bhawanipur Kursi Barawa, Sikta, West Champaran, Bihar-845307. [Pan: Alopa0369B] Vs. Ito, Nfac, Delhi…………..……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 22, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.11.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.9,68,550. The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny Under The E- Assessment Scheme, With The Specific Issue Of Verification Of Large Deduction Claimed Under Section 57 Of The Act. Notice Under Section 143(2) & Subsequently Under Section 142(1) Was Issued To The Assessee. Although The Assessee Uploaded Certain Documents Electronically In Response, The Details Were Found To Be Incomplete. The

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 57

69,124. However, the claim of Rs.58,83,717 under Section 57 was not routed through the profit and loss account. The assessee also failed to provide a proper breakup or substantiation of the said expenses, as required under Section 57(ii) of the Act, which mandates that such expenditure should be laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose

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

disallowed the whole deduction claimed under Section 80-IA of the Act, which primarily was in respect of work of construction and maintenance of roads in the State of Bihar. 12. That the appellant states that the ld assessing officer ought to have segregated the claim of deduction under Section 80-IA of the Act in respect of construction

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

disallowed the whole deduction claimed under Section 80-IA of the Act, which primarily was in respect of work of construction and maintenance of roads in the State of Bihar. 12. That the appellant states that the ld assessing officer ought to have segregated the claim of deduction under Section 80-IA of the Act in respect of construction

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

disallowed the whole deduction claimed under Section 80-IA of the Act, which primarily was in respect of work of construction and maintenance of roads in the State of Bihar. 12. That the appellant states that the ld assessing officer ought to have segregated the claim of deduction under Section 80-IA of the Act in respect of construction

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

disallowed the whole deduction claimed under Section 80-IA of the Act, which primarily was in respect of work of construction and maintenance of roads in the State of Bihar. 12. That the appellant states that the ld assessing officer ought to have segregated the claim of deduction under Section 80-IA of the Act in respect of construction

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

disallowed the whole deduction claimed under Section 80-IA of the Act, which primarily was in respect of work of construction and maintenance of roads in the State of Bihar. 12. That the appellant states that the ld assessing officer ought to have segregated the claim of deduction under Section 80-IA of the Act in respect of construction

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

disallowed the whole deduction claimed under Section 80-IA of the Act, which primarily was in respect of work of construction and maintenance of roads in the State of Bihar. 12. That the appellant states that the ld assessing officer ought to have segregated the claim of deduction under Section 80-IA of the Act in respect of construction

GURUDWARA BAL LEELA MAINI SANGAT TRUST,PATNA vs. DC/AC, EXEMPTION, PATNA

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

ITA 299/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna01 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 11Section 115Section 12ASection 250Section 69Section 69A

disallowance unless the prescription in the Section as mandated is not satisfied. 5. For that the learned assessing officer has erred in adding a sum of 31,78,100 on account of cash deposits in bank on different dates as unexplained money 2 I.T.A. No. 299/Pat/2024 Gurudwara Bal Leela Maini Sangat Trust under Section 69A read with Section

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)

69,220/-. The ld. Assessing Officer has initiated a proceeding under section 154 of the Income Tax Act. He observed in his order dated 28.06.2019 passed under section 154 of the Income Tax Act that the intention to rectify the assessment order was intimated to the assessee vide a notice dated 18.12.2018 and the copy of this notice has been

M/S KUMAR CONSTRUCTION,CHAPRA vs. I.T.O., WARD-CHAPRA, CHAPRA

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

ITA 201/PAT/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Kumar Construction Ito, Ward-Chapra P.O. Dumri Adda, P.S. Vs. Doriganj, Dist. Chapra. Pan: Aajfm 7295 G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Smt. Archana Sharma, Ca Respondent By : Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Preferred By The Assessee For The A.Y. 2008-09 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Passed By Osd, Cit(A) Dated 27.06.2014. The Assessee Has Taken The Following Revised Ground Of Appeal For A.Y. 2008-09 As Under: “I. An Expenses Of 10% Including The Expenses On Purchase Of Material Amounting To Rs. 14,21,032/- Has Been Disallowed & The Same Has Been Added To Assessees Total Income While Computation Of Tax. Ii. Sundry Creditors Amounting To Rs. 69,73,159/- Including Outstanding Labour Charges/Payment & Others Have Been Disallowed & The Same Has Been Added To Assessees Total Income While Computation Of Tax. Iii. Tax Imposed Upon The Assessee Is Very Harsh & Unjustifiable As It Makes The Net Profit Of The Assessee Approximately 31% Of The Revenue Received During The Year & As Such Impugned Order Required To Be Set Aside. So, We Pray For Consider The Revised Grounds Stated Above & Grant Relief For Assessee’S Income @ 6% Of The Total Receipts Of Rs. 2,84,29,497/-.”

For Appellant: Smt. Archana Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

disallowed and the same has been also added to total income of the assessee. Moreover, the ld. CIT(A) also did not give any relief to the assessee, while deciding the impugned order, the AR of the assessee further submitted that construction of road majorly requires materials have bitumen, stone chips, sand, mitti, morum, metal, bricks, cement, stone dust

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

disallowed nor any addition was made. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) quashed the reassessment proceedings holding that the assessee had disclosed all the facts and no new fact was available to the Assessing Officer. Therefore, it was mere change of opinion on the part of the Assessing Officer and as such, the reassessment proceedings could not have been validly initiated

M/S GUPTESHWARAM RICE MILL PVT LTD,KAIMUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3, GAYA

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 199/PAT/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Sept 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.199/Pat/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2003-04)

For Appellant: Shri K.N. Prasad, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 68

Section 68 unexplained unsecured loan addition of Rs. 4,69,886/- made in both the learned lower authorities’ respective orders that this taxpayer had failed to prove identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the credit parties, we find no merit to sustain the same since the same has come from the assessee’s four directors namely Avinash Tiwary, Shashi Nath Tiwary

SANOJ KUMAR SINGH ,HAJIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(3) , VAISHALI

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 366/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna05 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

disallowance merely on an estimation basis, the As- sessing Officer noted that total turnover/sales of the assessee during the year were Rs. 5,07,59,673/- out of which the assessee has deposited cash to the tune of Rs. 1,87,00,900/- during the year meaning thereby that the average deposit per month worked

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

disallowances of ascertained liabilities on the ground that the same has not actually been expanded / spent during the year under consideration which inter alia include audit fee, Miscellaneous Embezzlement, Theft, Robbery and defalcated amount without considering the fact that the appellant is maintaining its accounts on mercantile basis. The Ld. CIT(A) without any due application of mind and without

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

disallowances of ascertained liabilities on the ground that the same has not actually been expanded / spent during the year under consideration which inter alia include audit fee, Miscellaneous Embezzlement, Theft, Robbery and defalcated amount without considering the fact that the appellant is maintaining its accounts on mercantile basis. The Ld. CIT(A) without any due application of mind and without

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, PATNA, PATNA vs. YASHI FILMS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

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

ITA 462/PAT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Patna28 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 194JSection 250

disallowance of Rs. 8,30,23,893/on account of Professional and Technical Services (PTS) rendered by the appellant assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO stated that the assessee is engaged in producing feature films, purchase and sale of satellite rights, payment to actors, directors, composers and other professionals for the production of movies, serials

ARUN CONSTRUCTION,BHAGALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAGALPUR

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

ITA 315/PAT/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Aug 2022AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 147Section 250(6)Section 40Section 747

section 145(3) is not applicable. The income estimated in the manner provided u/s 144 of the I. T Act, 1961 @ 8% is arbitrary and unjust. The addition as made is fit to be deleted. (iii) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the disallowances of bonafide and legitimate deduction available to the assessee

ARUN CONSTRUCTION,BHAGALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAGALPUR

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

ITA 314/PAT/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Aug 2022AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 147Section 250(6)Section 40Section 747

section 145(3) is not applicable. The income estimated in the manner provided u/s 144 of the I. T Act, 1961 @ 8% is arbitrary and unjust. The addition as made is fit to be deleted. (iii) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the disallowances of bonafide and legitimate deduction available to the assessee