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.

60 results for “disallowance”+ Section 199clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai940Delhi883Bangalore281Kolkata234Chennai224Ahmedabad129Hyderabad107Jaipur91Chandigarh62Pune60Rajkot58Raipur45Indore44Lucknow43Calcutta38Cuttack29Jodhpur26Allahabad23Karnataka21Visakhapatnam18Surat15Cochin14Nagpur8Telangana7Amritsar5Agra4Rajasthan4SC4Punjab & Haryana3Patna1Ranchi1Jabalpur1Panaji1Orissa1Varanasi1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)40Section 139(1)39Section 15435Disallowance30Addition to Income30Section 143(1)24Section 80I20Section 8020Section 12A20Section 43B

KOTHARI AGRITECH PRIVATE LIMITED,SOLAPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, SOLAPUR

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2392/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 80Section 801ASection 80ISection 80J

Showing 1–20 of 60 · Page 1 of 3

19
Deduction14
Exemption10

199; 64. 2A recent Hon'ble Supreme court judgment in the case of PCIT vs Wipro, 446 ITR 1 (SC) has clarified guidelines with respect to claim admissibility in revised return. Extracts of the judgment is presented as below for ready reference “Also In such a situation, filing a revised return under section 139(5) of the IT Act claiming

KOTHARI AGRITECH PVT. LTD,,SOLAPUR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1, SOLAPUR

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2455/PUN/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2025AY 2018-2019

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 80Section 801ASection 80ISection 80J

199; 64. 2A recent Hon'ble Supreme court judgment in the case of PCIT vs Wipro, 446 ITR 1 (SC) has clarified guidelines with respect to claim admissibility in revised return. Extracts of the judgment is presented as below for ready reference “Also In such a situation, filing a revised return under section 139(5) of the IT Act claiming

B S ENTERPRISES,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

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

ITA 109/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act simply deals with the ‘Time of payment of wages’. It does not stipulate any time limit for deposit of the employees share in the relevant funds. For that purpose, the relevant Acts give a window for depositing the contribution within 15 days of the last month's salary. Thus, contribution

EXPERT GLOBAL SOLUTIONS P. LTD.,,AURANGABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC,, BANGALORE

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

ITA 199/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act simply deals with the ‘Time of payment of wages’. It does not stipulate any time limit for deposit of the employees share in the relevant funds. For that purpose, the relevant Acts give a window for depositing the contribution within 15 days of the last month's salary. Thus, contribution

EXPERT GLOBAL SOLUTIONS P. LTD.,,AURANGABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC,, BANGALORE

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

ITA 200/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act simply deals with the ‘Time of payment of wages’. It does not stipulate any time limit for deposit of the employees share in the relevant funds. For that purpose, the relevant Acts give a window for depositing the contribution within 15 days of the last month's salary. Thus, contribution

M/S ENERTECH UPS P LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

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

ITA 134/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act simply deals with the ‘Time of payment of wages’. It does not stipulate any time limit for deposit of the employees share in the relevant funds. For that purpose, the relevant Acts give a window for depositing the contribution within 15 days of the last month's salary. Thus, contribution

SHREE ASHTVINAYAK GLASS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

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

ITA 290/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act simply deals with the ‘Time of payment of wages’. It does not stipulate any time limit for deposit of the employees share in the relevant funds. For that purpose, the relevant Acts give a window for depositing the contribution within 15 days of the last month's salary. Thus, contribution

BALIRAJA SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

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

ITA 219/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act simply deals with the ‘Time of payment of wages’. It does not stipulate any time limit for deposit of the employees share in the relevant funds. For that purpose, the relevant Acts give a window for depositing the contribution within 15 days of the last month's salary. Thus, contribution

ASHOKA BUILDCON LIMITED,,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

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

ITA 235/PUN/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act simply deals with the ‘Time of payment of wages’. It does not stipulate any time limit for deposit of the employees share in the relevant funds. For that purpose, the relevant Acts give a window for depositing the contribution within 15 days of the last month's salary. Thus, contribution

GURU ENTERPRISES,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

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

ITA 186/PUN/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act simply deals with the ‘Time of payment of wages’. It does not stipulate any time limit for deposit of the employees share in the relevant funds. For that purpose, the relevant Acts give a window for depositing the contribution within 15 days of the last month's salary. Thus, contribution

NETSCOUT SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, PUNE

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

ITA 189/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act simply deals with the ‘Time of payment of wages’. It does not stipulate any time limit for deposit of the employees share in the relevant funds. For that purpose, the relevant Acts give a window for depositing the contribution within 15 days of the last month's salary. Thus, contribution

HYT ENGINEERING CO P LTD, ,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

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

ITA 110/PUN/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act simply deals with the ‘Time of payment of wages’. It does not stipulate any time limit for deposit of the employees share in the relevant funds. For that purpose, the relevant Acts give a window for depositing the contribution within 15 days of the last month's salary. Thus, contribution

ASHOKA BUILDCON LIMITED,,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

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

ITA 234/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. Phadke (Sl.No.1
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act simply deals with the ‘Time of payment of wages’. It does not stipulate any time limit for deposit of the employees share in the relevant funds. For that purpose, the relevant Acts give a window for depositing the contribution within 15 days of the last month's salary. Thus, contribution

DCIT, SWARGATE PUNE vs. GRIHUM HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1883/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Mutha and Abhilash HiranFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(1)Section 2(91)Section 36(1)(va)

disallowed by way of an intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Act. He submitted that following the same analogy whether 7 CO No.39/PUN/2024 indirect items can be considered as part of the gross turnover is a highly debatable issue and therefore, the CPC has no power to make any such prima facie adjustment. The Ld. Counsel

SHREE RAM CARGO PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(5), PUNE, PMT BUILDING, SHANKAR SHET ROAD, PUNE

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

ITA 1568/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1568/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shree Ram Cargo Private Limited, Vs. Ito, Ward-6(5), 3-A & B, Archies Court, Pune Shankar Shet Road, Pune 411 037 Maharashtra Pan : Aalcs3844A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil MuthaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40ASection 40A(3)

199 (Guj) “"Section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with rule 600 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962-Business disallowance

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

disallow deduction of all expenditure incurred in earning the dividend income under Section 115-O which is not includible in the total income of the assessee. 31. So far as the provisions of Section 115-O of the Act are concerned, even if it is assumed that the additional income tax under the aforesaid provision is on the dividend

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

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

disallow deduction of all expenditure incurred in earning the dividend income under Section 115-O which is not includible in the total income of the assessee. 31. So far as the provisions of Section 115-O of the Act are concerned, even if it is assumed that the additional income tax under the aforesaid provision is on the dividend

BHARAT KESHAVLAL SHAH,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -3,, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 855/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Sarvesh KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 199Section 199(1)Section 23Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 43BSection 56(2)(vii)

disallowance not made u/s 43B is not according to the provisions of the Act The issue raised be thus deleted. 6. Issue no 9 raised on account of difference in claim of TDS and income offered to tax is not according to the provisions of section 199

E-GAIN COMMUNICATIONS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2),, PUNE

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

ITA 2675/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2675/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 E-Gain Communications Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(2), Pune. Ltd., Office No.702, 7Th Floor, B-1, The Cerebrum It Park, Vadgaon Sheri, Kalyani Nagar, Pune- 411014. Pan : Aaacn9946R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Madhur Agarwal Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai : Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.06.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 13, Pune. [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 11.08.2017 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of The Companies Act, 1956. It Is Wholly Owned Subsidiary Of Egain Communication

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal
Section 10ASection 92C

disallowance under section 40(a)(i) and (ia) of the Act would be made. It is also pertinent to note that depreciation is a statutory deduction available to the assessee on a asset, which is wholly or partly owned by the assessee 13 and used for business or profession. The depreciation is an allowance and not an expenditure, loss

SIDHESH MOHAN RAIKAR,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE, BANGLORE

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

ITA 294/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.294/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Devendra JainFor Respondent: Shri Pramod Shahkar
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 199Section 5A

disallowance has been adjudicated in para 5.1 of this order, therefore, the AO is directed to recompute the interest payable under the provisions of section 234B & 234C in the Order Giving Effect accordingly. The Appeal filed on this ground is partly allowed for statistical purposes. TAX DEPAN 6. In the result, the appeal is Partly allowed for statistical purposes