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.

83 results for “disallowance”+ Section 115clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,747Delhi1,523Bangalore626Chennai362Kolkata240Ahmedabad234Jaipur169Hyderabad159Chandigarh124Surat91Indore89Pune83Raipur75Cochin74Amritsar53Cuttack52Visakhapatnam46Calcutta37Rajkot36Lucknow35Guwahati35Ranchi29Karnataka27Allahabad24Panaji23Nagpur22Dehradun13Telangana11Patna10SC9Varanasi8Jodhpur7Jabalpur4Punjab & Haryana3Kerala2Agra2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Orissa1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Addition to Income69Section 143(3)52Section 12A44Disallowance41Deduction39Section 80I32Section 14A31Section 69B30Section 143(1)29Section 115

PIAGGIO VEHICLES PVT LTD ,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 4, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 611/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh ChauguleFor Respondent: Smt. Deepa Sanjay Hiray
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

115-O was reintroduced the position was reversed. The above, actually fortifies the situation that Section 14A of the Act would operate to disallow

M/S. PIAGGIO VEHICLES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 4,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 83 · Page 1 of 5

28
Section 1127
Double Taxation/DTAA13
ITA 868/PUN/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.868/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Piaggio Vehicles Private Ltd., V The Assistant Sky One Corporate Park, S Commissioner Of Income Ground Floor, Survey Tax, Circle-4, Pune. No.239/02, Near Pune Airport, Pune – 411032. Pan: Aabcp1225G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Siddhesh Chaugule – Ar Revenue By Shri Vidya Ratan - Dr Date Of Hearing 18/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23/12/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-13, Pune For Assessment Year 2015-16 Dated 06.10.2022 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Refund Of Excess Taxes Paid On Dividend Distributed On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Hon'Ble Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Granting The Benefit Of Article 11 Of The India-

Section 115Section 2(24)Section 250Section 3Section 4

115-O was reintroduced the position was reversed. The above, 10 actually fortifies the situation that Section 14A of the Act would operate to disallow

POONAWALLA SHARES & SECURITIES PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH-TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 380/PUN/2020[2016/17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2022

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.380/Pun/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Poonawalla Shares & Securities The Assistant Pvt. Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income 16-B,/1, Sarosh Bhavan, Tax, Dr.Ambedkar Road, Circle-4, Pune. Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaacp 6087 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Percy Pardiwala – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 08/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Pune’S Order Dated 11.12.2019 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-3/Cir 4/193/2018-19/428, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

Section 143(3)Section 14A

section is against all canons of law and is too pedantic an approach. In this regard, reliance is placed on the following judgements, which elucidate the above principle-  B Shama Rao vs. Union Territory of Pondicherry (1967 AIR SC 1480) (SC) (Constitution Bench) “It is trite to say that a decision is binding not because o f its conclusion

FOSECO INDIA LIMITED,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(!), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2014-15 is dismissed

ITA 1116/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Atul PoddarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 115Section 115JSection 237

Section 115-0 of the Act and not at the rate of tax applicable to the non-resident shareholder as specified in the relevant DTAA with reference to such dividend income. Wherever the Contracting States to a tax treaty intend to extend the treaty protection to the domestic company paying DDT, only then, the domestic company can claim benefit

FOSECO INDIA LIMITED,PUNE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2014-15 is dismissed

ITA 1117/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Atul PoddarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 115Section 115JSection 237

Section 115-0 of the Act and not at the rate of tax applicable to the non-resident shareholder as specified in the relevant DTAA with reference to such dividend income. Wherever the Contracting States to a tax treaty intend to extend the treaty protection to the domestic company paying DDT, only then, the domestic company can claim benefit

FOSECO INDIA LIMITED,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1 (1), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2014-15 is dismissed

ITA 1114/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Atul PoddarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 115Section 115JSection 237

Section 115-0 of the Act and not at the rate of tax applicable to the non-resident shareholder as specified in the relevant DTAA with reference to such dividend income. Wherever the Contracting States to a tax treaty intend to extend the treaty protection to the domestic company paying DDT, only then, the domestic company can claim benefit

FOSECO INDIA LIMITED,PUNE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2014-15 is dismissed

ITA 1120/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri Atul PoddarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 115Section 115JSection 237

Section 115-0 of the Act and not at the rate of tax applicable to the non-resident shareholder as specified in the relevant DTAA with reference to such dividend income. Wherever the Contracting States to a tax treaty intend to extend the treaty protection to the domestic company paying DDT, only then, the domestic company can claim benefit

FOSECO INDIA LIMITED,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE1(1), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2014-15 is dismissed

ITA 1119/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Atul PoddarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 115Section 115JSection 237

Section 115-0 of the Act and not at the rate of tax applicable to the non-resident shareholder as specified in the relevant DTAA with reference to such dividend income. Wherever the Contracting States to a tax treaty intend to extend the treaty protection to the domestic company paying DDT, only then, the domestic company can claim benefit

FOSECO INDIA LIMITED,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1 (1), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2014-15 is dismissed

ITA 1118/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Atul PoddarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 115Section 115JSection 237

Section 115-0 of the Act and not at the rate of tax applicable to the non-resident shareholder as specified in the relevant DTAA with reference to such dividend income. Wherever the Contracting States to a tax treaty intend to extend the treaty protection to the domestic company paying DDT, only then, the domestic company can claim benefit

FOSECO INDIA LIMITED,PUNE vs. ACIT ,CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2014-15 is dismissed

ITA 1115/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Atul PoddarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 115Section 115JSection 237

Section 115-0 of the Act and not at the rate of tax applicable to the non-resident shareholder as specified in the relevant DTAA with reference to such dividend income. Wherever the Contracting States to a tax treaty intend to extend the treaty protection to the domestic company paying DDT, only then, the domestic company can claim benefit

SHREE SHIV SAHYADRI NAGARI SAHAKARI PATHSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 7(3) PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1788/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1788/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shree Shiv Sahyadri Nagari V The Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Pathanstha S Ward-7(3), Pune. Maryadit, Sai Park Road, Dighi, Pune – 411015. Pan: Aaeas1417N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Deepak Sasar – Ar Revenue By Smt. Shabana Parveen – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 06/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07/11/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 28.06.2024 For A.Y.2019-20. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Ld.Cit(A) Has Wrongly Confirmed The Disallowance Of Deduction Of Rs.15,60,115/- Claimed By The Appellant U/S.80P(2)(A)(I) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Alternatively, The Interest Income Earned By The Appellant From The Investments In A Co-Operative Bank Is Also Eligible For Deduction Under Section 80P(2)(D) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Appellant Crave Leave To Add, Delete, Amend, Alter, Vary And/Or Withdraw All Or Any One Of The Above Grounds Of Appeal.”

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(v)Section 2Section 250Section 80ISection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

section 250 of the Income tax Act, 1961 dated 28.06.2024 for A.Y.2019-20. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. The Ld.CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed the disallowance of deduction of Rs.15,60,115

MAHATMA PHULE GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKAR PAT SANSTHA LTD,KOLHAPUR vs. PCIT-1, PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 1049/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19 Mahatma Phule Gramin Bigarsheti Pcit-1, Pune Sahakar Pat Sanstha Vs. A/P Hattiwade, Ajara, Kolhapur – 416505 Pan: Aaaam2608K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None (Written Submission Filed) Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 09-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09-01-2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: None (written submission filed)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 80ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowance of deduction under section 80P, without appreciating that compliance under section 80AC is not mandatory and it is discretionary and further, by implication, AO had accepted one of the views in case of debatable issue. 3. The assessee craves leave to amend, alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeal. It is prayed that the above claims

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE -5, PUNE vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA PVT LTD.,, PUNE

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

ITA 323/PUN/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Sept 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker
Section 10ASection 14ASection 35Section 35(1)

disallowed the same. 34 On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) following the decision of the Tribunal for the assessment year 2008-09 onwards allowed said expenditure is revenue expenditure u/s 35(1)(iv) of the Act. Being aggrieved by the decision of the ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before

INDUS BIOTECH LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 122/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2025AY 2019-20
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)

disallowance of\nexpenditure incurred in relation to the IPO which was subsequently\naborted amounting to INR 1,17,25,562/- under section 37 of the Act.\n3. 2. The Appellant prays that the claim of the Appellant be allowed.\nGround No. 4\n4.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in\ndirecting

JOHN DEERE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

ITA 692/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17 John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Acit , Pune Tower.No.14, Magarpatta City, Cyber City, Vs. Hadapsar,I.E.S.O., Pune – 411013 Pan: Aaacj4233B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak Department By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 16-07-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22-07-2024 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp :

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 90Section 90(2)

disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act. 4. Before the CIT(A) the assessee through an additional ground challenged the order of the Assessing Officer in not granting the credit of the excess Dividend Distribution Tax of Rs.2,88,31,272/- paid by the assessee. It was submitted that in respect of the dividend declared by it, the dividend distribution

AUTOCOMP CORPORATION PANSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,PUNE vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE

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

ITA 2646/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 May 2025AY 2013-14

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

115 JB of the Act. Your appellant submits that the reassessment of income was not called for in the light of the aforesaid facts and order of reassessment of income be quashed. 4. Addition on account of stock of traded goods Rs.5,78,28,111/- in the reassessment u/s 147. The learned CITA failed to consider the submissions made against

AUTOCOMP CORPORATION PANSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,PUNE vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

ITA 2647/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 May 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

115 JB of the Act. Your appellant submits that the reassessment of income was not called for in the light of the aforesaid facts and order of reassessment of income be quashed. 4. Addition on account of stock of traded goods Rs.5,78,28,111/- in the reassessment u/s 147. The learned CITA failed to consider the submissions made against

NILESH POPATLAL GADA,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(4) , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 1538/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 250Section 68

disallowance of claim of agriculture income of Rs 5,52,310/- and addition u/s 68 of the Act treating the same as unexplained cash credit is unwarranted, unjustified and contrary to the provisions of the Act and facts prevailing in the case. It further be held that no addition is warranted in the case of the Appellant. The addition

PIAGGIO VEHICLES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -4,, PUNE

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

ITA 3029/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 3029/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Piaggio Vehicles Private Limited „Sky One‟, 9Th Floor, S. No.210, Final Plot No.72, Town Planning Scheme, Yerwada No.1, Kalyani Nagar, Pune-411 006. Pan : Aabcp1225G .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-4, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Bhaskhar Reddy
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

section 115-0 of the Act is held to be in excess of the rate applicable for taxability of dividend in India as per the India -Italy Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement, is the Appellant entitled for refund of such excess DDT paid.” ADJUDICATION OF THE GROUNDS IN APPEAL MEMO 3. The Ld. Senior Counsel for the assessee opening his argument

NIRAMAYA MEDICAL FOUNDAION AND RESEARCH CENTRE PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(4),, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 793/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.793/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Niramaya Medical Foundation The Ito, Ward-2(4), Pune. & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd., Vs Gat No.105, Plot No.245-249, . Jalochi Taluka, Baramati, Pune – 413102. Pan: Aabcn 3300 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Dr Date Of Hearing 12/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Pune’S Order Dated 10.01.2017 Passed In Appeal No.Pn/Cit(A)- 2/Ito Wd-2(4)/Pn/534/2015-16, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

Section 115JSection 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 72

disallowance / addition of Rs.76,28,309/- as follows: “5. In grounds 4 to 6, the appellant is aggrieved against computation of book profit under 115JB. The Assessing Officer while computing the book profit made following observations in the assessment order. “During the year, net profit as per profit and loss account has been calculated at Rs.80,81,354/-. According