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 115clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,747Delhi1,523Bangalore626Chennai362Kolkata240Ahmedabad210Jaipur168Hyderabad148Chandigarh102Indore89Surat84Pune81Raipur75Cochin74Amritsar53Visakhapatnam46Cuttack37Calcutta37Lucknow35Guwahati35Rajkot35Ranchi29Karnataka27Nagpur22Allahabad22Telangana11Dehradun11Patna10SC9Varanasi8Jodhpur7Punjab & Haryana3Panaji3Jabalpur3Kerala2Agra1Orissa1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 14A8Section 2602TDS2Disallowance2Addition to Income2

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S TDS MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT PVT LTD

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA/382/2019HC Punjab & Haryana06 Feb 2020

Bench: It Should Be Reinstated & Decided On Merits ? (Ii) Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Hon'Ble Itat Is Justified In Dismissing The Miscellaneous Application Of The Revenue Without Discussing The Merits Ignoring The Legislative Intent Expressed In Cbdt'S Anuradha 2020.02.12 17:37 I Attest To The Accuracy & Integrity Of This Document

Section 14ASection 260

115 ITR 519 ? (iv) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT is justified in dismissing the Miscellaneous application and not deciding the merits, without appreciating the fact that there is no such restriction to disallow the interest to extent exempt income stipulated either in section

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ROHTAK vs. M/S CRYSTAL PHOSPHATES LTD

ITA/140/2013HC Punjab & Haryana
28 Mar 2023

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

Section 144Section 80

disallowance of Rs.5,60,207/- and the appeal of the assessee was pending before CIT (A) and as per the CBDT instructions contained in Scrutiny Guidelines for F.Y. 2007-08 in clause 2 (v) (b) provided that all cases in which an appeal was pending before the CIT (A) against an addition/disallowance of Rs.5 lakhs or above, or the Department

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, CHD vs. M/S AGRI KING TRACTORS AND EQUIPMENTS PVT. LTD.

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA/356/2019HC Punjab & Haryana29 Jan 2020

Bench: It Should Be Reinstated & Decided On Merits ?” Ii. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Itat Is Justified In Directing The Assessing Officer To Verify The Claim Of The Assessee Having Not Earned Any Exempt Income In The Year Under Consideration & Allow The Relief Accordingly, Ignoring The Legislative Intent Anuradha 2020.01.30 16:03 I Attest To The Accuracy & Integrity Of This Document

Section 14ASection 260

disallowance irrespective of the fact whether any such income has been earned during F.Y. or not as confirmed by Apex Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT, 91 Taxman.com 154 (SC) ? iii. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. ITAT is justified in directing the assessing officer to verify the claim of the assessee