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.

1,161 results for “disallowance”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,784Delhi5,166Chennai1,842Bangalore1,433Ahmedabad1,166Pune1,161Kolkata1,085Hyderabad986Jaipur870Cochin733Indore480Chandigarh477Surat385Raipur346Visakhapatnam337Rajkot310Nagpur306Lucknow217Panaji185Amritsar175Cuttack152Jodhpur135Ranchi120Patna103Agra101Guwahati101Dehradun88Jabalpur63Allahabad50Varanasi23

Key Topics

Section 80P(2)(d)92Section 80P(2)(a)88Deduction76Section 143(3)75Section 80P75Disallowance58Section 143(1)53Addition to Income53Section 14A43Section 54F

ADVIK HI TECH PVT LTD,PUNE vs. DY.COMM.OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 8, PUNE, AKURDI PUNE

In the result, the cross appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1158/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1158/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Advik Hi Tech Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Gat No.357, Plot No.99, Village- Kharabwadi, Tal.- Khed, Chakan- 410501. Pan : Aacca3106E Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1330/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Vs. Advik Hi Tech Pvt. Ltd., Gat No.357, Plot No.99, Village- Kharabwadi, Tal.- Khed, Chakan- 410501. Pan : Aacca3106E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharad A. Shah & Shri Rohit S. Tapadiya Revenue By : Shri Amol Khairnar Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Dated 16.10.2023 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A. Shah &For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35

Showing 1–20 of 1,161 · Page 1 of 59

...
29
Section 143(2)25
Exemption16
Section 35(1)
Section 80G
Section 80I

disallowance on these deductions claimed. Further, the assessment order does not state anything about disallowance on these deductions. However, the deductions

DCIT, CIRCLE 8 PUNE, PUNE vs. ALFA LAVAL INDIA PVT LTD, PUNE

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

ITA 2270/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Oct 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 92C

disallowed the expenses on\naccount of non-deduction of TDS which has been duly disallowed in the\nITR for AY 2017-18 on account

EATON TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

ITA 1160/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Pune03 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Smt. Vishal KalraFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 40

disallowance u/s.40(a)(i) at Rs.26,39,84,698/-. 3.1 Subsequently, the PCIT examined the record and noted that the AO has allowed deduction

VIKRAM SHIKSHAN SANSTHA SEVAKANCHI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO WARD2(1) KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 291/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.291/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80P

disallowing deduction under Chapter VIA of the Act including disallowing deduction u/s.80P of the Act where return is not filed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1661/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2016-17
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 80I

deduction and disallowance of\nweighted deduction claimed u/s.35(2AB) respectively. During the assessment\nproceedings, it was noticed that the DSIR

RENU ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 5, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 132/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.132/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Renu Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, Circle-5, Pune. S.No.2/6, Near Baner Telephone Exchange, Baner, Pune- 411045. Pan : Aaacr8741G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S. Pathak Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Date Of Hearing : 25.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.09.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.12.2023 Passed By Ld Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1] The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Weighted Deduction Amounting To Rs.9,25,79,494/- U/S 35(2Ab) Of The Act. 2] The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Assessee Company Was Not Entitled To Claim Weighted Deduction U/S 35(2Ab) Since Form No. 3Cla Was Filed By The Assessee Beyond The Due Date Specified U/S 139(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 35Section 37(1)

disallowance of deduction u/s 35(2AB) r.w. rule 6(1)(7A)(c). Accordingly, the addition towards disallowance of deduction u/s 35(2AB) r.w. rule

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1660/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2014-15
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 80I

deduction and disallowance of\nweighted deduction claimed u/s.35(2AB) respectively. During the assessment\nproceedings, it was noticed that the DSIR

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1663/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 80I

deduction and disallowance of\nweighted deduction claimed u/s.35(2AB) respectively. During the assessment\nproceedings, it was noticed that the DSIR

DHARMAVEER SAMBHAJI NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT MARYADIT,PUNE vs. PCIT, PUNE

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

ITA 1217/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21 Dharmaveer Sambhaji Nagari Pcit-3, Pune Sahakari Pat Maryadit Vs. A/P Manchar, Tal-Ambegaon, Dist. Pune – 410503 Pan: Aaaad5228N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sandip Argade Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 13-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 16-01-2026

For Appellant: Shri Sandip ArgadeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 3Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

disallowed the deduction u/s 80P of the Act to the extent of Rs.14,95,730/- out of total deduction claimed

DESAI INFRA PROJECTS (I) PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. CIT(A), PUNE-11, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands

ITA 1852/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Dec 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(1)Section 288Section 44ASection 801ASection 801A(7)Section 80I

deduction u/sec.80IA(4) of the Act. It was further submitted that the CPC 3 ITA.No.1852/PUN./2024 does not have power to disallow

NASHIK DISTRICT POLICE CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD NASHIK,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CANTER, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 727/PUN/2025[AY 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2026

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.727/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2018-19 Nashik District Police Co- V The Income Tax Officer, Operative Credit Society Ltd., S National E Assessment Sagar Plaza, Third Floor, Above Centre, Delhi. Axis Bank, Audumbar Nagar, Mumbai Agra Road, Nashik – 422003. Pan: Aacan6075F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By Smt Neha Thakur – (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 20/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2018-19 Dated 23.02.2024 Emanating From Assessment Order U/S.143(3) Read With Section 143(3A) & 143(3B) Of The I.T.Act, Dated 31.03.2021. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 250Section 66Section 80Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

deduction u/s 80P. So disallowed as deduction u/s 80P & added as income from other sources (IFOS). (Disallowance as 80P & addition

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 8 PUNE, PUNE vs. ALFA LAVAL INDIA PVT LTD, PUNE

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

ITA 1723/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1723/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri H. AnandaFor Respondent: Shri Nikhil Pathak
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

Disallowance of claim of 37,89,868 deduction on account of Ind AS 4 Disallowance of Information 6,15,83,672 Technology

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE vs. PRAKASH RAMKRISHNA POPHALE, PUNE

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

ITA 283/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Prasad BhandariFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Addl.CIT
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 54Section 54(1)

disallowed the deduction u/s.54F in the case of appellant whereas the deduction claimed was u/s.54 of Act. 3. Property sold

SHRI SANT SENA MAHARAJ NABHIK SAMAJACHI NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA, MARYADIT,JALGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WRD-1(4), JALGAON, JALGAON

The appeal of the assessee is DISMISSED

ITA 841/PUN/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 841/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Shri Sant Sena Maharaj Nabhik Samajachi Nagari Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit, Behind Shani Mandir, Radhabai Chal, Chalisgaon – 424 101 Pan: Aabas8462N . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Income Tax Officer- 1(4), Jalgaon . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Abhay Avachat [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Shri R Y Balawade [‚Ld. Dr] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 10/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 01/09/2023 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Instituted U/S 253(1) Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereafter] Challenges Din & Order No. Itba/Nfsc/S/250/2023- 24/1052715471(1) Dt. 10/05/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Nfac’ Hereafter].

For Appellant: Shri Abhay Avachat [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Shri R Y Balawade [‚Ld. DR]
Section 139Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)Section 80Section 80P

deduction u/s 80P of chapter VI-A of the Act and (2) the jurisdiction to disallow 80P deduction in summary

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8, PUNE, PUNE vs. ADVIK HI-TECH PVT. LTD., PUNE

In the result, the cross appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA\nNo

ITA 1330/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Feb 2025AY 2020-21
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(1)Section 80GSection 80I

disallowance of Rs.67,87,728/- claimed as deduction\nu/s 80G, confirmed the disallowance on account of deduction of\nRs.13,46,18,011/- claimed

ELECTRONICA FINANCE LIMITED,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PMT BUILDING, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1111/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1111 & 1112/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2022-23 & 2023-24 Electronica Finance Limited, Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru. Audumber, 101/1, Dr. Ketkar Road, Pune City, Deccan, Gymkhana, S.O., Pune- 411004. Pan : Aaace4577B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Narendra Joshi (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde : Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 28.02.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Surat [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Years 2022-23 & 2023-24 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1111/Pun/2025 For Assessment Year 2022-23 As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Joshi (Virtual)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80J

deduction u/s 80JJAA is not justified. 3. The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the disallowance of deduction

ELECTRONICA FINANCE LIMITED,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PMT BUILDING, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1112/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1111 & 1112/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2022-23 & 2023-24 Electronica Finance Limited, Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru. Audumber, 101/1, Dr. Ketkar Road, Pune City, Deccan, Gymkhana, S.O., Pune- 411004. Pan : Aaace4577B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Narendra Joshi (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde : Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 28.02.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Surat [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Years 2022-23 & 2023-24 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1111/Pun/2025 For Assessment Year 2022-23 As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Joshi (Virtual)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80J

deduction u/s 80JJAA is not justified. 3. The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the disallowance of deduction

SHRI GAJANAN NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,SATARA vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

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

ITA 2077/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2077/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Shri Gajanan Nagari Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Sahakari Patsanstha Kolhapur. Maryadit, Malakpur, Tal- Karad, Dist.- Satara, Karad- 415110. Pan : Aabas8429B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Vinod Pawar Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.12.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 04.07.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) Ground No. 1- Addition Of Rs. 2,14,62,523/- As Unexplained Cash Credit (U/S 68) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Ao Erred In Making An Addition Of Rs. 2,14,62,523/- On Account Of Unexplained Unsecured Loans Without Considering The Nature Of Deposits.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Pawar
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowance of deduction of Rs.10,33,487/- u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the IT Act and disallowance of deduction

T AND T INFRA LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-7, PUNE

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

ITA 291/PUN/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17 T & T Infra Limited Acit, Circle – 7, Pune A-1, Vishnu Vihar, Bibwewadi Vs. Kondhwa Road, Market Yard, Pune – 411037 Pan: Aaect3902H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tarun Ghia Department By : S/Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari & Sourabh Nayak Date Of Hearing : 10-07-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 01-10-2024 O R D E R Per Astha Chandra, Jm :

For Appellant: Shri Tarun GhiaFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari and Sourabh Nayak
Section 143(2)Section 80I

deduction u/s 80IA(4). 3. The learned CIT(A) has further erred in confirming the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA

DCIT, CIRCLE-8, PUNE vs. MAHLE ANAND THERMAL SYSTEMS PVT. LTD., PUNE

ITA 228/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri R D OnkarFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 35Section 35(1)(iv)

disallowance of claim for weighted deduction (at 200%) has allowed the alternate claim for deduction u/s 35 (1) (iv) of the outside