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 41(1)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,262Delhi4,061Bangalore1,635Chennai1,263Kolkata980Ahmedabad630Hyderabad537Jaipur453Pune275Chandigarh266Indore224Surat218Raipur205Nagpur157Amritsar156Lucknow144Cochin106Agra92Karnataka89Rajkot89Visakhapatnam88Cuttack82Allahabad66Guwahati54Calcutta46Panaji43SC40Telangana33Ranchi26Jodhpur23Varanasi22Patna19Kerala15Dehradun13Punjab & Haryana4Rajasthan4Jabalpur3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Orissa2Himachal Pradesh1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Tripura1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1

Key Topics

Section 2634Addition to Income3Section 260A2Section 11(1)(a)2Deduction2

M/S SHREE DIGVIJAYA WOOLLEN MILLS LTD. AMRITSAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMT-TAX, AMRITSAR

ITR/3/2010HC Punjab & Haryana22 Mar 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

Section 256(2)

1,72,537 16,376 8.66% 9. 1983-84 5,08,958 76,336 13.04% Thus, it was submitted that the A.O went on an erroneous presumption by assuming that the percentage of wastage of 13.04% is excessive just by looking at the data of previous two years without appreciating the fact that the wastage of percentage accepted

BHARTI BHUSHAN JINDAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LUDHIANA

ITA/385/2014HC Punjab & Haryana03 Jul 2025

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

Section 142(2)Section 143(2)Section 260A
Section 271
Section 36(1)(vii)
Section 36(2)
Section 41(1)
Section 56
Section 57

disallowed the return of unrealized amount of Rs.10,50,000/- and added back the same to the income of the appellant and penalty proceedings under Section 271 (1)(c) of the IT Act were initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of account. The appellant filed appeal against order dated 29.12.2006 before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Ludhiana, who vide

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) GURUGRAM vs. M/S MAHARISHI MARKANDESHWAR UNIVERSITY TRUST

ITA/41/2021HC Punjab & Haryana24 Sept 2024

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

Section 11(1)(a)Section 263

1)(a) Less: Fixed assets considered as applied towards income from properties held for charitable purposes during the year during the year 65.73.64.136.73 22,79,04,609.17 Total Taxable Income Nil Unapplied fixed assets expenditure during the year : 42,94,59,527.56” 3. The PCIT invoking its powers under Section 263 of the Act revised the assessment order

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CONSUMER HEALTHCARE LTD

ITA/325/2016HC Punjab & Haryana04 Feb 2026

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Section 260ASection 80

1,41,58,549/- by excluding the excise duty in the valuation of closing stock? (v) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT is right in allowing the relief of Rs. 83,97,899/- by directing the AO to value the closing stock on the direct cost method as adopted