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 56(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,848Delhi4,035Bangalore1,565Chennai1,431Kolkata1,060Ahmedabad994Hyderabad602Jaipur523Pune379Indore357Chandigarh327Cochin270Surat259Raipur193Nagpur176Rajkot147Amritsar140Cuttack123Lucknow122Visakhapatnam117Agra103Karnataka84Panaji66Jodhpur63Guwahati57Allahabad55Calcutta53SC36Ranchi36Patna35Varanasi31Telangana29Dehradun26Jabalpur18Kerala13Orissa6Punjab & Haryana4Himachal Pradesh4Rajasthan2

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)5Section 260A2Deduction2Penalty2Addition to Income2

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 of actual ex way of interest on the borrowing e estimation made by the CIT ich is being discussed hereafter. As a consequence of our decisi d of section 14A for making the sessing Officer has referred allowance and the issue has a rties, we consider it appropria ejudice to our earlier view. It is also pertinent to mention

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 260ASection 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

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX FARIDABAD vs. M/S PIYUSH COLONIZERS LTD.

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/300/2019HC Punjab & Haryana10 Feb 2020

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)

56,65,810/-. In appeal, the 1st Appellate Authority quashed the disallowance of `7,70,72,993/- and addition was restricted to `1,85,92,817/-. For the addition sustained, penalty proceedings were initiated under Section

M/S ROCKMAN CYCLES INDS. LTD. vs. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, LDH. AND ANR.

The appeals are allowed and impugned orders are

ITA/244/2005HC Punjab & Haryana09 Feb 2023

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

Section 143Section 260Section 37

56,076/-. The appellant-company claimed ITA Nos. 244, 281, 282, 283 & 630 of 2005 2023:PHHC:056092-DB 3 deducted under Section 37 of Act 1961 on account of expenditure of Rs.61,38,000/- paid to M/s Mckinsey and Company Ltd for professional serviced rendered by it. However, the Assessing Officer disallowed both the claims of the assessee-Company