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.

3 results for “disallowance”+ Section 35Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai256Delhi208Chennai85Ahmedabad44Bangalore42Kolkata42Hyderabad33Raipur19Jaipur8Karnataka8Cochin7Rajkot5Pune3SC3Telangana3Guwahati3Cuttack3Punjab & Haryana2Visakhapatnam2Kerala1Dehradun1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Lucknow1Nagpur1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 15418Section 35D8Section 143(3)4Addition to Income3Section 142(1)2Section 154(1)2Deduction2Revision u/s 2632

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), PUNE, PUNE vs. IMPERIAL HOUSING, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1120/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(1)Section 35D

disallowance of Rs.2,75,50,640/-. So far as the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC holding that the issue is a debatable one and therefore the proceedings u/s 154 of the Act is not justified is concerned, he submitted that as per provisions of section 35D

IMPERIAL HOUSING, PUNE,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1792/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(1)Section 35D

disallowance of Rs.2,75,50,640/-. So far as the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC holding that the issue is a debatable one and therefore the proceedings u/s 154 of the Act is not justified is concerned, he submitted that as per provisions of section 35D

SOLAPUR SUGAR LIMITED,,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, SOLAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1425/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Aug 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 133(2)Section 35DSection 36Section 55(1)(b)

section 36 clause (1) sub-clause (iii) also makes the interest on capital asset to be disallowed till it commences production. The assessee could not demonstrate any nexus in improvement of land to pre- operative expenses. Hence, it cannot be capitalised. Even reliance placed by the assessee in the case of Cosmic Kitchen Pvt. Ltd. I.T.A. No. 5549/D/2010 is also