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.

6 results for “disallowance”+ Section 43A(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai85Delhi84Chennai46Kolkata26Bangalore19Ahmedabad14SC9Pune6Raipur6Hyderabad6Surat4Cochin3Indore2Amritsar2Dehradun2Jaipur2Ranchi2Agra1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)10Section 358Section 80G7Section 2636Section 1486Deduction6Disallowance6Addition to Income6Section 37(1)4Section 143(2)

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 35
4
Section 1474
Depreciation2
Section 35(1)
Section 80G
Section 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 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

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

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

section 43A of the Income Tax Act is only relating to the foreign exchange rate fluctuation in respect of assets acquired from a country outside India by using foreign currency loans which is not applicable to the indigenous assets acquired out of foreign currency loans. As stated earlier, the appellant had borrowed Term Loan in foreign currency for construction

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

section 43A of the Income Tax Act is only relating to the foreign exchange rate fluctuation in respect of assets acquired from a country outside India by using foreign currency loans which is not applicable to the indigenous assets acquired out of foreign currency loans. As stated earlier, the appellant had borrowed Term Loan in foreign currency for construction