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 50clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai7,733Delhi6,415Chennai2,030Bangalore1,970Kolkata1,799Ahmedabad1,004Hyderabad692Jaipur656Pune600Indore441Surat383Chandigarh375Raipur314Rajkot257Nagpur207Cochin201Visakhapatnam167Lucknow156Amritsar154Karnataka150Cuttack81Allahabad76Jodhpur66Telangana65Guwahati65Patna59Calcutta59SC55Ranchi52Agra47Panaji45Dehradun34Varanasi24Kerala19Jabalpur10Punjab & Haryana7Himachal Pradesh3Orissa3Rajasthan3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Uttarakhand1Gauhati1Bombay1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)4Section 2742

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HARI NARAIN PARWAL

ITA/90/2020HC Rajasthan21 Feb 2024

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,SHUBHA MEHTA

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

disallowing the alleged business expenditure noted that the assessee company had failed to file any agreement or supporting evidence in respect of the advance. 9. AO further adjusted the business loss of Rs. 14,046/- with the income from short term capital loss and assessed the total income at Rs. 96,88,900/- as against loss

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT LTD

ITA/6/2021
HC Rajasthan
01 Nov 2022

Bench: SANDEEP MEHTA,KULDEEP MATHUR

For Respondent: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

section 45 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was involved in that appeal before the Supreme Court. There was a lease agreement entered into in the year 1959 for 50 years, under which, the annual rent was paid by the Lessee to the Lessor. The lease would have continued till 2009. However, during the relevant previous year i.e. in March

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SKYWAYS INDUSTRIAL ESTATE COMPANY (P) LTD.

ITA/82/2020HC Rajasthan14 Feb 2022

Bench: AKIL KURESHI,SUDESH BANSAL

Sections 2(h), 2(j), 2(n), 2(t), 2(u) & 2(x). It is argued that in terms of the said provisions information of Registrants would be clearly covered and thus would have to be protected from disclosure. The said sections are extracted hereinunder for ease of reference: “2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,— (h) “data