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.

131 results for “disallowance”+ Section 253clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,410Delhi951Chennai279Bangalore224Kolkata200Ahmedabad163Chandigarh148Pune131Jaipur130Indore124Surat89Lucknow62Raipur57Allahabad52Hyderabad39Amritsar37Cuttack37Panaji36Cochin34Rajkot32Ranchi28Telangana25Guwahati21Nagpur18Jodhpur17Agra14Karnataka12Varanasi12Visakhapatnam9SC6Patna6Jabalpur4Calcutta2Dehradun2Uttarakhand1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Orissa1Punjab & Haryana1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)88Addition to Income83Section 14A82Section 271(1)(c)74Disallowance69Section 12A34Section 27432Section 133A31Section 153A29Section 11

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. BAJAJ FINANCE LTD., (FORMERLY: BAJAJ AUTO FINANCE LTD.,),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of Revenue and Cross Objections of assessee are dismissed

ITA 356/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.356/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Kirit Kamdar
Section 201Section 271C

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, while computing taxable income, was not accepted. The assessee also explained that the said provision made on adhoc basis was reversed in the subsequent year and wherever payment was made to the specific party, tax was deducted at source and paid to the credit of Central Government. The JCIT however

MAGARPATTA TOWNSHIP DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed

Showing 1–20 of 131 · Page 1 of 7

26
Deduction26
Penalty25
ITA 1266/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1242/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle 9, Pune …. Vs. M/S. Ksh International Pvt. Ltd., Gat No.11/3, 11/4, Vill-Birdewadi, Chakan, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tal-Khed, Pune – 410501 Pan:Aaacb1897K

For Appellant: Shri Prashant GadekarFor Respondent: Shri A.N. Kothary
Section 143(3)Section 14A

disallowance under section 14A of the Act was not permissible and the appeal of Revenue was dismissed. The Revenue filed Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and vide judgment dated 08.02.2019 in item No.33 Court No.11 Section XIV, in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary Nos.2755/2019, it was held that In view of the decision of this Court

M/S. NYATI BUILDERS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1240/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1242/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle 9, Pune …. Vs. M/S. Ksh International Pvt. Ltd., Gat No.11/3, 11/4, Vill-Birdewadi, Chakan, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tal-Khed, Pune – 410501 Pan:Aaacb1897K

For Appellant: Shri Prashant GadekarFor Respondent: Shri A.N. Kothary
Section 143(3)Section 14A

disallowance under section 14A of the Act was not permissible and the appeal of Revenue was dismissed. The Revenue filed Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and vide judgment dated 08.02.2019 in item No.33 Court No.11 Section XIV, in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary Nos.2755/2019, it was held that In view of the decision of this Court

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. M/S. KSH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1242/PUN/2017[2013 -14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2019

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1242/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle 9, Pune …. Vs. M/S. Ksh International Pvt. Ltd., Gat No.11/3, 11/4, Vill-Birdewadi, Chakan, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tal-Khed, Pune – 410501 Pan:Aaacb1897K

For Appellant: Shri Prashant GadekarFor Respondent: Shri A.N. Kothary
Section 143(3)Section 14A

disallowance under section 14A of the Act was not permissible and the appeal of Revenue was dismissed. The Revenue filed Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and vide judgment dated 08.02.2019 in item No.33 Court No.11 Section XIV, in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary Nos.2755/2019, it was held that In view of the decision of this Court

FCA INDIA AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED (SURVIVING ENTITY AFTER THE MERGER OF PCA MOTORS PVT LTD),PUNE vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

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

ITA 1781/PUN/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Apr 2025

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh ChauguleFor Respondent: Ms. Shilpa N. C
Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

253 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act'), against the 2 order dated 26 June 2024 issued by the National Faceless Appeal Centre ('NFAC') (hereinafter referred to as 'Ld. NFAC'), under Section 250 of the Act on the grounds as set out herein: 1. General ground 1.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE vs. M/S. BAJAJ FINANACE LTD,, PUNE

ITA 818/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala and Ms. Vasanti B. Patel
Section 14ASection 37Section 37(1)

disallowance for the earlier assessment years which were on the ground that the assessee which was following the mercantile system of banking had to pay tax on interest on accrual basis. 3.2 The issue eventually reached the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, allowed the assessee's claim, upon which, the Revenue has filed this appeal. 4. Learned counsel

BAJAJ FINANCE LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE

ITA 766/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala and Ms. Vasanti B. Patel
Section 14ASection 37Section 37(1)

disallowance for the earlier assessment years which were on the ground that the assessee which was following the mercantile system of banking had to pay tax on interest on accrual basis. 3.2 The issue eventually reached the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, allowed the assessee's claim, upon which, the Revenue has filed this appeal. 4. Learned counsel

DCIT, CIRCLE-8 vs. M/S. BAJAJ FINANCE LTD. PUNE, AKURDI PUNE

ITA 819/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala and Ms. Vasanti B. Patel
Section 14ASection 37Section 37(1)

disallowance for the earlier assessment years which were on the ground that the assessee which was following the mercantile system of banking had to pay tax on interest on accrual basis. 3.2 The issue eventually reached the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, allowed the assessee's claim, upon which, the Revenue has filed this appeal. 4. Learned counsel

BAJAJ FINANCE LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE

ITA 767/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala and Ms. Vasanti B. Patel
Section 14ASection 37Section 37(1)

disallowance for the earlier assessment years which were on the ground that the assessee which was following the mercantile system of banking had to pay tax on interest on accrual basis. 3.2 The issue eventually reached the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, allowed the assessee's claim, upon which, the Revenue has filed this appeal. 4. Learned counsel

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE vs. M/S. BAJAJ FINANCE LTD,, PUNE

ITA 1722/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Respondent: Assessee by Ms. Vasanti B. Patel
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 37(1)

disallowance for the earlier assessment years which were on the ground that the assessee which was following the mercantile system of banking had to pay tax on interest on accrual basis. 3.2 The issue eventually reached the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, allowed the assessee's claim, upon which, the Revenue has filed this appeal. 4. Learned counsel

BAJAJ FINANCE LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE

ITA 1394/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Respondent: Assessee by Ms. Vasanti B. Patel
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 37(1)

disallowance for the earlier assessment years which were on the ground that the assessee which was following the mercantile system of banking had to pay tax on interest on accrual basis. 3.2 The issue eventually reached the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, allowed the assessee's claim, upon which, the Revenue has filed this appeal. 4. Learned counsel

KIMBERLY CLARK LEVER P.LTD.,PUNE vs. ACIT, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2481/PUN/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2481/Pun/2012 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Kimberly Clark Lever P. Ltd., Gat No.934 To 937, Village Sanaswadi Off Nagar Road, Ta- Shirur, Pune-412208. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaack4647E बनाम / V/S. Acit, Circle-Xi(I), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Percy Pardiwalla Revenue By : Shri Sandeep Garg सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 22.02.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Final Assessment Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Short) Of The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Pune (‘The Assessing Officer’ For Short) Dated 29.10.2012 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “The Appellant Objects To The Order Dated 29 October 2012 Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144(C) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 11(1), Pune [‘Acit’ Or ‘Ao’] Following The Directions Issued By The Dispute Resolution Panel (‘Drp’) In Respect Of The Aforesaid Assessment Year On The Following Among Other Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Garg
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 194JSection 40Section 9(1)(vii)

disallowance on account of selling discount of Rs.3,25,68,847/- given to HUL. It is submitted that the HUL is the distributor of products of the appellant company and selling discount was 17 given to the HUL towards the sale cost. It is submitted that the HUL was not responsible for the control and conduct of the business

TETRA PAK INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DY.CIT, CIR.7, PUNE, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 111/PUN/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Aug 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.111/Pun/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Tetra Pak India Private Ltd., Mayfair Towers, Wakdewadi, Shivajinagar, Pune-411005. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaact3467B बनाम / V/S. Dcit, Circle-7, ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue By : Shri S. B. Prasad सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02.07.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 27.08.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of Assessing Officer/Tpo/Drp For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- “Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Tetra Pak India Private Limited (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Appellant’) Respectfully Craves Leave To Prefer An Appeal Under Section 253(1)(D) Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Act’), Against The Order Dated 25 November 2010 Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax- Circle 7 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Assessing Officer’) Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Act In Pursuance Of The Directions Dated 20 September 2010 Issued By The Honorable Dispute Resolution Panel (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Honorable Drp’), On The Following Grounds: On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Honorable Drp & Consequentially The Learned Ao Have: I Grounds Of Objections In Respect Of Transfer Pricing Adjustment

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 253(1)(d)

253(1)(d) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’), against the order dated 25 November 2010 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax- Circle 7 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Assessing Officer’) under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) of the Act in pursuance of the directions dated 20 September 2010 issued

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

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]. 2. Tersely stated facts of the case are; 2.1 The appellant assessee is a credit co-operative society and for assessment year 2019-20 [‘AY’ hereafter

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-8, PUNE vs. NEELIMA PANKAJ THORAT, PUNE

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

ITA 153/PUN/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.153/Pun/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Dcit, Circle-8, Vs. Neelima Pankaj Thorat, Pune Flat No.C/1201, The Metropolitan, Pimpri Chinchwad Link Road, Chinchwad, Pune 411 033 Pan : Aegpt 3582C Appellant Respondent

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 253Section 253(2)Section 36(1)(va)

section 253(2), it becomes manifest that the AO, having territorial jurisdiction over the assessee, is authorized to file appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. AR fairly admitted that the JCIT (OSD), Circle-8, Pune is the 5 and CO No.13/PUN/2023 Neelima Pankaj Thorat territorial Assessing Officer of the assessee, who in the present case had filed the appeal

DCIT, SWARGATE PUNE vs. CUMMINS INDIA LTD , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 1256/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Dec 2025AY 2018-19
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 250Section 80JSection 92C

253 of the\nincome-tax Act, 1961 (\"the Act\") against the order dated 30 June\n2022, passed under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) read\nwith section 1448 of the Act, by the learned additional/ Joint/\nDeputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income tax, National Faceless\nAssessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as \"Assessing\nOfficer /\"AO\") in pursuance of the directions

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)

section 115BBE computation as well as regarding 43B disallowance, TDS claim vis- à-vis income offered to tax u/s.199(1) and deemed rent issue with 4 ITA.No.855/PUN/2019 Shri Bharat Keshavlal Shah, Pune. liberty to raise appropriate contentions before the Assessing Officer in consequential proceedings. Rejected in very terms. 7. This leaves us with the first and foremost issue

TETRA PAK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee for assessment year

ITA 521/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(3)

section 253(2)(A) by the Finance Act, 2016 w.e.f. 01-06-2016 the Revenue will have no right to appeal against the directions issued by DRP. Hence, merely to keep the issue alive DRP has rejected contentions of the assessee in assessment year 2012-13, though, in earlier assessment years the DRP had accepted and approved aggregation approach followed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. M/S. TETRA PAK INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee for assessment year

ITA 665/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(3)

section 253(2)(A) by the Finance Act, 2016 w.e.f. 01-06-2016 the Revenue will have no right to appeal against the directions issued by DRP. Hence, merely to keep the issue alive DRP has rejected contentions of the assessee in assessment year 2012-13, though, in earlier assessment years the DRP had accepted and approved aggregation approach followed

TETRA PAK INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee for assessment year

ITA 635/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(3)

section 253(2)(A) by the Finance Act, 2016 w.e.f. 01-06-2016 the Revenue will have no right to appeal against the directions issued by DRP. Hence, merely to keep the issue alive DRP has rejected contentions of the assessee in assessment year 2012-13, though, in earlier assessment years the DRP had accepted and approved aggregation approach followed