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 75clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,520Delhi3,854Bangalore1,536Chennai1,175Kolkata1,100Ahmedabad684Hyderabad504Jaipur439Indore308Chandigarh277Pune269Surat239Cochin162Raipur139Karnataka133Rajkot121Lucknow116Nagpur103Amritsar96Cuttack78Allahabad66Visakhapatnam63Guwahati57Ranchi48Calcutta43Telangana42Jodhpur34Agra33Patna26Panaji20SC20Dehradun18Varanasi15Jabalpur7Kerala6Punjab & Haryana5Rajasthan2Himachal Pradesh2RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1Tripura1Orissa1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 115J4Section 35D3Section 260A3Section 2(15)3Section 12A3Deduction2Addition to Income2Disallowance2

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

Section 2(15). The Tribunal, therefore, rightly directed the Assessing Officer to delete disallowance of exemption. 74. It cannot possibly be suggested that the Government of Punjab formed the trusts under the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 because it wanted to carry on the business as colonizers or developers under the mask of the category “objects of general public utility

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, JALANDHAR vs. M/S MAX INDIA LTD

Appeal is hereby dismissed in limine

ITA/272/2022
HC Punjab & Haryana
19 Oct 2023

Bench: MR. JUSTICE GURMEET SINGH SANDHAWALIA,MS. JUSTICE HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN

Section 260ASection 36(1)(iii)

section 36(1)(iii) on interest free loan given to sister concerns whereas the aassessee itself in the same year, has charged interest @ 13.5% on advances given to its another concerns M/s Pharmax Corp Ltd.? (ii) Whether on the facts of the case, Ld. ITAT has erred in law ignoring the AO’s finding that the assessee company has advanced

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX FARIDABAD vs. M/S NHPC LTD

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/336/2015HC Punjab & Haryana20 Sept 2019

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 2Section 2(24)Section 24Section 260ASection 28

75,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) (and not under section 115JB) on account of “Advance Against Depreciation” ignoring the provisions of section 2(24) read with section 28 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which provides that “income” includes profits and gains and the profits and gains of any business or profession carried

M/S MAJESTIC AUTO LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF IT & ANR

ITA/290/2005HC Punjab & Haryana05 Dec 2025

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

Section 260Section 35D

disallowed. 2. The matter relates to Assessment Year 1997-98. The appellant is engaged in the business of automobile parts. With intent to expand its business outside the country, it incurred travelling and staff expenses outside the country during 1995-96 and 1996-97. The appellant attempted to set up a unit in China. The project could not be materialized

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)

disallowing the rate of wastage, which is simply based on personal whims of the A.O. It was further submitted that the G.P. rate for the year under consideration is 24.92% which is highest from A.Y. 1975-76 onwards and once the assessee itself has come with the highest rate of G.P., no justification can be given to pin point