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.

4 results for “disallowance”+ Section 10(25)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai8,341Delhi7,267Bangalore2,562Chennai2,168Kolkata1,829Ahmedabad1,726Pune1,439Jaipur1,175Hyderabad1,140Indore631Surat600Chandigarh576Raipur426Visakhapatnam333Cochin332Rajkot285Amritsar277Cuttack261Lucknow232Nagpur222Karnataka213Agra146Guwahati105Allahabad97Jodhpur85Panaji84Ranchi82SC78Telangana64Patna51Calcutta50Dehradun45Jabalpur33Varanasi28Kerala20Rajasthan8Himachal Pradesh4Punjab & Haryana4Orissa3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Gauhati1Andhra Pradesh1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Bombay1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1Tripura1

Key Topics

Section 2(15)3Section 12A3Section 112Exemption2

M/S PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, GARHA ROAD , JALANDHAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JALANDHAR AND ANR

ITA/271/2014HC Punjab & Haryana04 Dec 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Section 11

disallowed to get benefit of Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’). ITA No. 33 of 2022 has been filed by the assessee arising out of order dated 12.11.2021 passed by the ITAT dismissing its ITA No.1426/Chd/2018 for the assessment year 2015-2016, upholding the order of the CIT (A) declaring the assessee not entitled

MASCOT FOOTCARE FARIDABAD THRG ITS PARTNER GUNJAN LAKHANI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX FARIDABAD (HARYANA)

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA/192/2012HC Punjab & Haryana12 May 2023

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Section 143(1)
Section 14A
Section 260
Section 36
Section 36(1)
Section 36(1)(iii)

10(34) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and hence, since dividend does not form the part of total income and when the financial burden incurred by the assessee for acquiring shares should have been proportionately disallowed by invoking section 14 of the Income Tax Act, 1961." (ii) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

M/S PANCHSHEEL TEXTILE MANFAC. & TRAD. vs. C I T AND ANR.

ITA/109/2007HC Punjab & Haryana13 May 2025

Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

disallowance. However, since to the section to support also been argued before us by ate to deal with the issue with hat in the event of our order gett pplication of section 14A would d to consider the applicability 4A which has been inserted by reads as under:- ) of the end no the nce M/S to pose

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CHANDIGARH vs. M/S IMPROVEMENT TRUST BATHINDA

The appeals are hereby dismissed

ITA/161/2016HC Punjab & Haryana17 Nov 2025

Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA

Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 260A

10,97,950/- 21. The entire emphasis of the revenue is on the fact that the assessee-Trust had earned profits by selling plots. This itself cannot be a ground for denying the benefit under Section 11 of the Act, especially when it is not disputed that the selling of plots and premises by the trust is only incidental