Search: disallowance | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

827 results for “disallowance”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai7,529 Delhi5,434 Chennai2,855 Bangalore2,173 Kolkata1,982 Ahmedabad1,020 Pune827 Hyderabad602 Jaipur582 Chandigarh287 Cochin280 Indore259 Karnataka248 Raipur235 Lucknow222 Surat194 Nagpur176 Visakhapatnam166 Rajkot143 Amritsar100 Cuttack83 Calcutta77 Guwahati65 Jodhpur65 SC61 Agra46 Panaji46 Telangana44 Ranchi43 Patna32 Dehradun31 Kerala24 Allahabad21 Jabalpur17 Varanasi15 Punjab & Haryana8 Orissa8 Rajasthan7 Himachal Pradesh5 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3 Gauhati2 ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Section 14A143 Section 143(3)72 Section 1160 Section 12A60 Disallowance60 Addition to Income56 Exemption53 Deduction40 Section 80P(2)(d)39 Section 148

E-ALLY SECURITIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,RAIGAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE, PANVEL, PANVEL

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

ITA 109/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Samir ShahFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha - JCIT

Section 143(2)Section 14A

disallowed. The assessee explained that it has earned only Rs.2,000/- as exempt income which the assessee itself has disallowed

PRECISION CAMSHAFTS LTD.,SOLAPUR vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT (NFAC), SOLAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1962/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 827 · Page 1 of 42

...

34

Section 143(1)33

Section 80P(2)(a)33

ITAT Pune

10 Jul 2025

AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1962/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Precision Camshafts Ltd., V Assessment Unit, Income Tax E-102/103, Akkalkot Road, S Department (National Midc, Solapur – 413006. Faceless Assessment Center), Maharashtra. Jurisdiction Details : Pne- C(1), Range 63, Circle-1, Solapur. Pan: Aabcp1086B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(3) Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2020-21 Dated 25.07.2024, Emanating From Order Of Dispute Resolution Panel U/S.144C(5) Of The Act For A.Y.2020-21

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(5)Section 92(3)Section 928Section 92C

disallowance u/s 14A more than the exempt income earned. Assessee had already made disallowance u/s14A to the extent of exempt

SHREE GARUDA PLANT PRODUCTS LTD,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 (2),, NASHIK

ITA 492/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.492/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shree Garuda Plant Products The Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Vs Ward-1(2), Nashik. B-26, Additional Midc Area, Ambad, Nashik. Pan: Aaacg 0563 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nishint Gandhi – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 20/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 14/10/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Nashik For The Assessment Year 2015-16, Dated 19.02.2019, Emanating Out Of Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 26.12.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1.In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 1, Nashik ["The Cit (A)" For Short] Erred In Confirming The Order Of The Learned Income Tax Officer - 1 (2), Nashik, ["The Ao" For Short] Which Was Passed In Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice Without Affording A Proper Opportunity Of Being Heard To The Appellant. 2. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Invoking Section 14A R.W.R. 8D Of The Act, Whereby A Disallowance Of Rs.12,81,831/- Was Made In The Hands Of The Appellant.

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 2Section 2(22)(e)

disallowance cannot exceed the exempt income so earned by the assessee during the year under consideration.' If the disallowance is to be restricted

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), PUNE, PUNE vs. KAKADE INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2275/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.2275 & 2277/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Dcit, V Kakade Infrastructure Private Limited,20Th Floor, A Wing, Central Circle-2(2), S Pune. Marathon Futurx, N.M.Joshi Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400013. Pan: Aadck5852G Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Jay Bhansali (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Amol Khairnar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2013-14 A.Y.2014-15 Both Dated 30.07.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 28.03.2016 & 30.12.2016 Respectively. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

disallowance cannot exceed the exempt income so earned by the assessee during the year under consideration.' If the disallowance is to be restricted

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), PUNE vs. KAKADE INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2277/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.2275 & 2277/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Dcit, V Kakade Infrastructure Private Limited,20Th Floor, A Wing, Central Circle-2(2), S Pune. Marathon Futurx, N.M.Joshi Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400013. Pan: Aadck5852G Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Jay Bhansali (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Amol Khairnar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2013-14 A.Y.2014-15 Both Dated 30.07.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 28.03.2016 & 30.12.2016 Respectively. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

disallowance cannot exceed the exempt income so earned by the assessee during the year under consideration.' If the disallowance is to be restricted

JCIT (OSD), CIRCLE 14, PUNE vs. KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

ITA 20/PUN/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar &

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

disallowance u/s 14A is warranted in the absence of any exempt income, directed the Assessing Officer to delete suo moto

JCIT (OSD), CIRCLE 14, PUNE vs. KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

ITA 21/PUN/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar &

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

disallowance u/s 14A is warranted in the absence of any exempt income, directed the Assessing Officer to delete suo moto

JCIT (OSD), CIRCLE 14, PUNE vs. KUMAR BUILDER MUMBAI REALTY PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

ITA 22/PUN/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar &

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

disallowance u/s 14A is warranted in the absence of any exempt income, directed the Assessing Officer to delete suo moto

M/S. FERROCARE INTERNATIONAL,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 14(3),, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1247/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Ferrocare International Vs. Ito, Ward S.No.32/3/8, Yewalewadi Road, 14(3), Pune Kondhwa Budruk, Pune – 411048 Pan: Aaaff5100C Appellant Respondent

Section 114Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 14A(2)

disallowance of Rs. 36,000/- u/s. 14A and has earned exempt dividend of Rs.36,34,978/-. The basis of disallowance

INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, JALGAON vs. PRAMOD BHAICHAND RAISONI,, JALGAON

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1398/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 194A(3)(iii)Section 40

disallowance to the amount of the income claimed as exempt or the disallowance offered by the assessee at Rs.51,363/-, whichever

INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, JALGAON vs. PRAMOD BHAICHAND RAISONI,, JALGAON

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1397/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 194A(3)(iii)Section 40

disallowance to the amount of the income claimed as exempt or the disallowance offered by the assessee at Rs.51,363/-, whichever

AJINKYATARA SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,,SATARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -1, , SATARA

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 544/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Pratik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar

disallowance to the extent of expenditure incurred in earning the exempt income earned. The AO shall examine the same and disallow

AJINKYATARA SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,,SATARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -1, , SATARA

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 545/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Pratik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar

disallowance to the extent of expenditure incurred in earning the exempt income earned. The AO shall examine the same and disallow

AJINKYATARA SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,,SATARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -1, , SATARA

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 543/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Pratik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar

disallowance to the extent of expenditure incurred in earning the exempt income earned. The AO shall examine the same and disallow

BIRLASOFT LTD,(EARLIER KNOWN AS KPIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD),,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1424/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

disallowance as laid down by the assessee. He referred to the exempt income earned by the assessee and the disallowance

KIRLOSKAR INDUSTRIES LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14 (5),, PUNE

ITA 268/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav

Section 10(34)Section 14A

exempt income. The assessee explained the expenditure disallowed by the assessee is reasonable and the said disallowance was worked out on the basis

KIRLOSKAR INDUSTRIES LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

ITA 1383/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav

Section 10(34)Section 14A

exempt income. The assessee explained the expenditure disallowed by the assessee is reasonable and the said disallowance was worked out on the basis

KIRLOSKAR INDUSTRIES LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14,, PUNE

ITA 267/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav

Section 10(34)Section 14A

exempt income. The assessee explained the expenditure disallowed by the assessee is reasonable and the said disallowance was worked out on the basis

KIRLOSKAR INDUSTRIES LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

ITA 787/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav

Section 10(34)Section 14A

exempt income. The assessee explained the expenditure disallowed by the assessee is reasonable and the said disallowance was worked out on the basis

POPATRAO DASHRATHRAO SURYAWANSHI,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 7(3), PUNE

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

ITA 2788/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Manoj JainFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT DR

Section 139Section 148Section 54B

Disallowance of exemption claimed Rs. 3,60,35,153/- U/Sec.54B of the Act 2 Disallowance of exemption claimed Rs. 37,09,902/- U/Sec.54F