Search: disallowance

99 results for “disallowance”+ Section 260clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Addition to Income75 Section 143(3)72 Disallowance59 Section 153A38 Section 10A29 Section 14A24 Deduction23 Section 40A(3)19 Section 43B19 Section 143(1)18 Section 14818 Search & Seizure18

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

260 and also raising the consequential tax demand of INR 4,465,790. 2. Addition made, of INR 4,297,560 which has resulted in the same amount being disallowed twice. 2.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in upholding the addition made in intimation order under section

VIJAY VYANKATRAO MANE,SADASHIV PEATH vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER , ADDL/JCIT(A)- CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 1845/PUN/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Apr 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

260/-. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act by the CPC passing intimation dated 01.08.2016 wherein the CPC made disallowance of Rs.33,53,759/-. 2 3. Before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), it was submitted that the variance made by the CPC is due to the interest paid by the assessee. It was submitted that since there

SUDHAKAR BAJIRAO SHISODE,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NASHIK

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

ITA 2780/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2780/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Bhagyesh DeshmukhFor Respondent: Shri Manish Sinha

Section 144BSection 147Section 2Section 250Section 69CSection 80C

260/- is unjustified and contrary to law, and hence liable to be deleted. Amount of disallowance of ₹6,740/- is accepted and will be paid according to the direction of income tax department. 2. Ground on Addition Under Section

LIQUIDHUB ANALYTICS PVT. LTD. (NOW MERGED WITH CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LTD),PUNE vs. NFAC, PUNE

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

ITA 1952/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Smt Nilu Jaggi, CIT

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act 13 The Ld. AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 270A of the Act on arbitrary premise that there is under-reporting of income done by the Appellant The above grounds are without prejudice to each other The appellant craves leave to alter, amend or withdraw

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

260 (SC)] (Tata Tea decision') was not dealing with the nature of DOT as to whether it is tax on the company or a tax on the shareholder. Thus, the Tata Tea decision does not support the cause of assesses, having regard to the well settled principle that a judicial precedent is only "an authority for what it actually decides

RAMESH G PORWAL,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1727/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Mar 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.G. NaharFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Vivek Aggarwal

Section 143(3)Section 14A

disallowance u/s.14A. 5.2.3. Finally it needs to be decided whether the AO has rightly computed the business profits relating to the sale of scrips of Bharti Ship Yard and Punjab National Bank, by taking the sale consideration arising in the hands of the sister concern. The appellant admittedly sold the shares to M/s. Phoenix Warehousing Pvt. Ltd. on 28th

UMAKANT GAJANAN FOUNDATION,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 863/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 May 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.863/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24 Umakant Gajanan Foundation, V The Income Tax Officer, E-3/5, Shirine Garden, Opp.Iti, S Ward-1(1), Pune. Aundh, Pune – 411007. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaatu5190M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri Madhan Thirmanpallil – Addl.Cit(Dr) – Date Of Hearing 15/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/05/2025

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 11.02.2025 for the A.Y.2023-24 emanating from the order u/s.143(1) of the Act dated 02/12/2024. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : ITA No.863/PUN/2025 [A] “1] The learned Addl. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.2,64,260/- made by the learned CPC without appreciating that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. ATLAS COPCO (INDIA) LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2286/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 154

section 154 of the Act for making such disallowance. Against the findings of Assessing Officer the Revenue is in appeal. 3. The solitary ground raised by the Department in appeal is as under : “1. “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that the issue under consideration cannot

M/S. B. M. CHAPALKAR & SONS,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

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

ITA 2906/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2906/Pun/2016 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. B.M. Chapalkar & Sons, 26, Dehbanoo Complex, Nashik Pune Road, Nashik Road, Nashik-422 101, Pan: Aadfb5084C .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Dhoke

Section 139Section 194ASection 201Section 3(1)Section 40

260 when the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) are not applicable to short deduction in view of the decisions. The addition may please be deleted. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Assessing Officer is not justified in making the addition of Rs.1,54,977 when the date of payment

MILIND PRALHAD BHANDARKAR,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1559/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Sarang GudhateFor Respondent: Shri Prathamesh J. Lawand

Section 14A

Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟). Accordingly, he disallowed Rs.4,35,518/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and Rs.2,76,260

PUNE MATHADI HAMAL AND OTHER MANUAL WORKERS BOARD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1012/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1012/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pune Mathadihamal & Other The Income Tax Manual Workers Board, V Officer, Shramashakti Bhavan, S Ward-5(1), Pune. Coomercial Plot No.1, Market Yard, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aaalp0097L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Vipul Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari & Shri Rajesh Gawali– Dr’S Date Of Hearing 17/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Orders Of Ld.Commissionerof Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Act Dated 14.07.2023 :

For Appellant: 2. The ld.AR submitted written submissions, relevant part of the same is reprodu

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250

section 40A (2) of the Act. The assessee i.e NLT had received services from TACL in respect of which payment had been made as per documentary evidence on record and thus, there was no warrant for disallowance paid to TACL by the assessee when the payment was adjudged on the principle of commercial expediency when viewed from the point

M/S PERSISTENT SYSTEMS LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 692/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.692/Pun/2022 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S.Persistent Systems Assessment Unit, Income Limited, V Tax Department. “Bhageerath” 402, Senapati S Bapat Road, Pune – 411016. Pan: Aabcp 1209 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Dhanesh Bafna& Shriaditya Vaidya– Ar’S Revenue By Shri Suhas Kulkarni - Irs Addl Commissioner Of Income Tax Date Of Hearing 26/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02/11/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order, Dated 20.07.2022 Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Ground 1: Order Is Invalid / Non Est  On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessment Unit (‘Au’) Has Erred In Passing The Draft Assessment M/S.Persistent Systems Limited [A]

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144(11)Section 144(7)Section 144BSection 144C(6)(C)

disallowance of INR 4,50,70,798 under u/s 14A of the Act r.w rule 8D(2)(ii) be deleted. Ground 10: Additional relief under section 90 On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the AU based on the directions of Ld. DRP erred in disregarding Appellant’s claim for additional relief under section

JAIBHAGWAN BANARASIDAS JINDAL,JALNA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA

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

ITA 2016/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

260 and Net gain will be Rs.250 (sale price Rs.260-Purchase price Rs.10). Also application form for subscribing the shares was attached with the said email. The image of this file is reproduced by the Assessing Officer at page 3 of the assessment order. Subsequently, it was found that M/s. Anax Com Trade Ltd. has been merged with M/s. Yamini Investment

NARHARI MAHARAJ MAJOOR SAHAKARI SANSTHA LTD,JALGAON vs. ITO, WARD 1(4), JALGAON, JALGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for as per terms indicated above

ITA 1458/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1458/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Vs Ito, Ward Narhari Maharaj Majoor Sahakari Sanstha Ltd., 1(4), Jalgaon C/O Bhagyesh Hari Dhakane, 18, Pitashri, Gruhkul Colony, Midc, Jalgaon-425001 Maharashtra Pan-Aaaan6252G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vinay KawaiaFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P

disallowance of deduction u/s 80P of Rs. 18,98,260/- made by CPC, Bangalore for delay in filing the I.T. return for A.Y. 2018- 19 without considering that such powers were given to CPC by making necessary amendment in section

SONAL SANDEEP SATAV,PUNE vs. PCIT, PUNE-2, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 945/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sarang GudhateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

260 ITR 599(MAD)] have held that action under section 263 is valid where the assessment order is passed without application of mind and without conducting proper inquiry. Reliance is also placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. [(2000)(243 ITR 83(SC)]. wherein it was clearly held that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRADDHA CONSTRUCTIONS & POWER GENERATION PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

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

ITA 461/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.570/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal

Section 132Section 132(4)

disallowance of expenditure u/s.14A of the Act against the said buffer disclosure of income. In that case, Rs. 75 lakhs was offered as buffer and the issue of disclosure u/s.14A of the Act created the additional income exceeding the said buffer disclosure of Rs.75 lakhs. Further, in the said decision, the income assessed never fell below the returned income. However

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI SHIVAJI BHAGWANRAO JADHAV,, PUNE

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

ITA 681/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 153A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI SHIVAJI BHAGWANRAO JADHAV,, PUNE

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

ITA 682/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 153A

SHIVAJI BHAGWANRAO JADHAV,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

ITA 699/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 153A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE vs. SAKAL PAPERS LIMITED,, PUNE

The appeal of the Revenue is DISMISSED

ITA 2445/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 2445/Pun/2017 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle–6, Pune. . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. Sakal Paper Ltd., 595, Budhwar Peth, Pune – 411 002 Pan :Aaccs7605Q . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Ashok Kothary Revenue By : Shri Ramnath Murkunde सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 13/06/2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 13/06/2023 आदेश/ Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Of The Revenue Is Assailed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, [For Short ‘Cit-(A)’] Dt. 22/06/2017 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’] For The Assessment Year [For Short ‘Ay’] 2011-12. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 6

For Appellant: Shri Ashok KotharyFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 154Section 250Section 35DSection 43BSection 80I

260/- as against foregoing assessed income on account of disallowance u/s 14A and claim of chapter VI-A made u/s 80IA of the Act. 2.3 Subsequently by service of notice u/s 148 on 04/03/2016 the was reopened and the income of the assessee re-assessed at ₹7,12,34,270/- u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide order

Showing 1–20 of 99 · Page 1 of 5