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.

4 results for “disallowance”+ Section 11Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai62Delhi45Kolkata31Bangalore19Ahmedabad16Hyderabad14Lucknow11Chennai8Amritsar8SC8Indore6Jaipur4Dehradun4Pune4Nagpur4Cuttack3Karnataka3Visakhapatnam3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Calcutta2Jodhpur2Jabalpur1Cochin1Surat1Telangana1Chandigarh1

Key Topics

Section 80I14Section 143(1)8Section 1438Deduction4Section 139(1)3Section 44A2Section 801B2Disallowance2Addition to Income2

KISANMITRA WAREHOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED ,LATUR vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU , BENGALURU

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

ITA 359/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.358 & 359/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2020-21 & 2021-22 Kisanmitra Warehousing Private Limited, Vs. Adit, Cpc, Plot No.B-113, 114, 115, 117, Bengaluru Additional Midc, Latur, Maharashtra 413 531 Pan : Aaeck0739A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Subham RathiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 44ASection 80I

section 143 of the Act by disallowing the deduction us.80IB(11A) in the absence of prescribed Report in Form No.10CCB

KISANMITRA WAREHOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED,LATUR vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

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

ITA 358/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.358 & 359/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2020-21 & 2021-22 Kisanmitra Warehousing Private Limited, Vs. Adit, Cpc, Plot No.B-113, 114, 115, 117, Bengaluru Additional Midc, Latur, Maharashtra 413 531 Pan : Aaeck0739A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Subham RathiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 44ASection 80I

section 143 of the Act by disallowing the deduction us.80IB(11A) in the absence of prescribed Report in Form No.10CCB

SAHYADRI FARMERS PRODUCER COMPANY LIMITED,NASHIK vs. ACIT CIRCLE - 1, NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 951/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.951/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Sahyadri Farmers Producer Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Nashik. Company Limited, Survey No.1102/8, Behind Police Head Quarter, Adgaon, Nashik- 422003. Pan : Aapcs1516D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kishor B. Phadke Revenue By : Shri Amit Bobde Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.10.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 03.03.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-6, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “ (All The Grounds Are Without Prejudice To Each Other) 1. The Learned Addl/Jcit (A)-6 Delhi Erred In Law & Fact In Upholding Disallowance U/S Boib(114) Amounting To Rs.8,73,57,770 Made By Learned Dcit, Cpc (Hereinafter

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(1)Section 801BSection 80I

disallowing the deduction of Rs. 8,73,57,770/- claimed u/s 801B(11A) without taking into consideration the submission filed by the appellant for the year under consideration. 3. The learned I-T authorities ought to have appreciated that delay filing of Form 10CCB will not disentitle the appellant from an eligible deduction, considering the liberal interpretation of section

BUILT UP,PUNE vs. ADIT, BANGLORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2531/PUN/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Feb 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2019-20 Built Up Adit, Cpc, Bangalore 1, Samda Apartment, Vs. Dr Ketkar Margs, Ghodke Chowk, Pune – 411004 Pan: Aaefb6432D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri V L JainFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay, CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80I

disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act on the ground that Form No.10CCB was not filed along with the return or was filed beyond the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act where the due date was 31.10.2019. We find the Ld. Addl / JCIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed