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.

5 results for “disallowance”+ Section 43Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai65Karnataka51Ahmedabad38Delhi27Chennai16Telangana15Bangalore13Hyderabad9Kolkata9Jaipur7Pune5Cochin4SC3Surat3Lucknow2Cuttack2Visakhapatnam2Raipur1Rajkot1Jodhpur1Chandigarh1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)12Section 40A(3)7Section 44A5Addition to Income5Section 2633Section 143(2)3Section 43D3Section 43B3Deduction3Set Off of Losses

SANJAY VASANTRAO WANI,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2491/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2491/Pun/2016 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi
Section 40A(3)Section 44A

disallowance to the extent of 10% i.e. Rs. 21,430/- out of telephone expenses, petrol & diesel expenses, travelling expenses and depreciation allowances particularly when the AO has not brought on record any instances which indicates that the impugned expenses includes any personal element. 6. The Appellant craves for addition to, deletion, alteration, modification, change any of the grounds. 5. Before

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, INCOME TAX OFFICE, JALNA vs. THE BEED DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP. BANK LTD., BEED

3
Disallowance2

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 802/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Feb 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nDepartment by
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43BSection 43D

section 43C of the Income-tax Act on the scheduled bank.\n11. Learned counsel for the appellants-Revenue placed reliance on the\njudgment in the case of Southern Technologies Ltd. (supra). However, this\njudgment pertains to non-banking financial companies. UCO Bank's case\n(supra) and Mercantile Bank Ltd. (supra) case squarely applies to the facts\nof the present

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, INCOME TAX OFFICE, JALNA vs. THE BEED DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP. BANK LTD., BEED

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 801/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Feb 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Shubham N. RathiFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43BSection 43D

section 43C of the Income-tax\nAct on the scheduled bank.\n11. Learned counsel for the appellants-Revenue placed reliance on the judgment\nin the case of Southern Technologies Ltd. (supra). However, this judgment\npertains to non-banking financial companies. UCO Bank's case (supra) and\nMercantile Bank Ltd. (supra) case squarely applies to the facts of the present case

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, INCOME TAX OFFICE, JALNA vs. THE BEED DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP. BANK LTD., BEED

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 800/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Feb 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: \nDepartment by
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43BSection 43D

section 43C of the Income-tax Act on the scheduled bank.\n11. Learned counsel for the appellants-Revenue placed reliance on the\njudgment in the case of Southern Technologies Ltd. (supra). However, this\njudgment pertains to non-banking financial companies. UCO Bank's case\n(supra) and Mercantile Bank Ltd. (supra) case squarely applies to the facts\nof the present

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHARAD SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, appeal by the Revenue and cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1046/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha

section 43C of the Income-tax Act on the scheduled bank. 12. Learned counsel for the appellants-Revenue placed reliance on the judgment in the case of Southern Technologies Ltd. v. Joint CIT reported in [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC) ; [2010] 2 SCC 548. However, this judgment pertains to non-banking financial companies. UCO Bank's case (supra) and Mercantile