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.

9 results for “disallowance”+ Section 43Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai191Delhi188Chennai122Bangalore60Kolkata55Ahmedabad28Hyderabad15Surat10SC9Pune9Raipur8Karnataka5Telangana4Cochin3Indore2Amritsar2Dehradun2Guwahati2Jaipur2Kerala2Ranchi2Agra1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)11Disallowance9Addition to Income9Section 358Section 80G7Section 2636Section 376Section 1486Deduction6Depreciation

FRANCOIS COMPRESSOR INDIA 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 2504/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2504/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 ………. अपीलाथ" / Francois Compressor India Pvt. Ltd., Gat No.147/1(New), Lavale Road, Appellant Pirangut, Tal. Mulshi, Dist. Pune – 412115. Pan : Aabcf0496K. बनाम V/S ………. ""यथ" / The Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1 (2), Pune. Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharad Shah. Revenue By : Shri Amol Kamat. सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 18.08.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Dt.31.08.2017 Passed Under Sec.143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under : The Appellant Is A Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of The Companies Act, 1956. It Is Engaged In The Business Of Development & Sale

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kamat
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 41(1)
5
Section 37(1)4
Section 143(2)4
Section 92C

disallowing the loss on foreign exchange variation by holding to be capital. The ld. AR contended that the loss on account of fluctuation foreign currency rate on ECB loan should be allowed as revenue deduction in irrespective of for what purpose the loan was utilized having regard to the provisions of section 43AA of the Act and the Accounting Standard

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE vs. M/S. CARRARO INDIA PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1309/PUN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1261/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Carraro India Private Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Limited, Pune B-2/2, Midc, Ranjangaon, Pune – 412 220 Maharashtra, India Pan : Aaacc5292M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1309/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S. Carraro India Private Pune Limited, B-2/2, Midc, Ranjangaon, Pune – 412 220 Maharashtra, India Pan : Aaacc5292M Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri M.P. Lohia Revenue By Shri Shivraj B. Morey Date Of Hearing 14-07-2021 Date Of Pronouncement 15-07-2021

Section 37

disallowance inasmuch as the AO simply adopted the TPO‟s reasoning without showing as to how the same applied to the non- AE transactions as well. Further, the expenditure contains payment for Testing fees and also Generic service fee. To this extent, we approve the view taken by the ld. CIT(A). Thus, the ground of the Revenue is dismissed

M/S. CARRARO INDIA PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1261/PUN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1261/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Carraro India Private Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Limited, Pune B-2/2, Midc, Ranjangaon, Pune – 412 220 Maharashtra, India Pan : Aaacc5292M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1309/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S. Carraro India Private Pune Limited, B-2/2, Midc, Ranjangaon, Pune – 412 220 Maharashtra, India Pan : Aaacc5292M Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri M.P. Lohia Revenue By Shri Shivraj B. Morey Date Of Hearing 14-07-2021 Date Of Pronouncement 15-07-2021

Section 37

disallowance inasmuch as the AO simply adopted the TPO‟s reasoning without showing as to how the same applied to the non- AE transactions as well. Further, the expenditure contains payment for Testing fees and also Generic service fee. To this extent, we approve the view taken by the ld. CIT(A). Thus, the ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ADVIK HI TECH PVT LTD,PUNE vs. DY.COMM.OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 8, PUNE, AKURDI PUNE

In the result, the cross appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1158/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1158/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Advik Hi Tech Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Gat No.357, Plot No.99, Village- Kharabwadi, Tal.- Khed, Chakan- 410501. Pan : Aacca3106E Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1330/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Vs. Advik Hi Tech Pvt. Ltd., Gat No.357, Plot No.99, Village- Kharabwadi, Tal.- Khed, Chakan- 410501. Pan : Aacca3106E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharad A. Shah & Shri Rohit S. Tapadiya Revenue By : Shri Amol Khairnar Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Dated 16.10.2023 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A. Shah &For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(1)Section 80GSection 80I

disallowance u/s 35(2AB) of Rs.13,46,18,011/- was made for want of Form 3CL which is now available with the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and remit the matter

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8, PUNE, PUNE vs. ADVIK HI-TECH PVT. LTD., PUNE

In the result, the cross appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA\nNo

ITA 1330/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Feb 2025AY 2020-21
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(1)Section 80GSection 80I

disallowance u/s 35(2AB) of Rs.13,46,18,011/-\nwas made for want of Form 3CL which is now available with the\nassessee. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the\ninterest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order\npassed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and remit the matter

DCIT, CIRCLE-8, , PUNE vs. POSCO INDIA PUNE PROCESSING CENTER PVT. LTD., PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross Objections of the assessee for A

ITA 1002/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1001 & 1002/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri V. Krishna V. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Section 43A, irrespective of whether any actual repayment was effected during such previous year. 3. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that res-judicata is not applicable to the income tax proceedings and the AO is not precluded in taking the correct view

DCIT,CIRCLE-8, PUNE vs. POSCO INDIA PUNE PROCESSING CENTER PVT. LTD., PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross Objections of the assessee for A

ITA 1001/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1001 & 1002/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri V. Krishna V. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Section 43A, irrespective of whether any actual repayment was effected during such previous year. 3. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that res-judicata is not applicable to the income tax proceedings and the AO is not precluded in taking the correct view

M/S. CLASSIC CITI INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 434/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Hon. Vice- & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M. Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR &
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 37Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43A

disallowance of Rs.6,23,43,841/- u/s 37 of the Income Tax Act 1961. In support the appellant submitted that section 43A

M/S. CLASSIC CITI INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 433/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Hon. Vice- & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M. Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR &
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 37Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43A

disallowance of Rs.6,23,43,841/- u/s 37 of the Income Tax Act 1961. In support the appellant submitted that section 43A