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.

30 results for “disallowance”+ Section 10B(2)(i)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai922Delhi832Bangalore544Kolkata398Chennai304Ahmedabad224Pune201Hyderabad157Chandigarh98Jaipur63Cochin51Karnataka50Lucknow38Indore33Visakhapatnam32Cuttack32Rajkot30Surat27Nagpur15Amritsar14Jodhpur13Agra10Telangana9Dehradun8Guwahati8Varanasi7Panaji6Ranchi6Calcutta4Raipur4Patna4Jabalpur3Allahabad1SC1Himachal Pradesh1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 80P84Section 143(1)48Section 143(1)(a)43Section 139(1)30Deduction27Section 11(2)22Disallowance22Section 10A21Section 1118Exemption

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2,, JAMNAGAR vs. M/S. DEEP RECYCLOING INDUSTRIES,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 367/RJT/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Praveen Verma, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Gokani, A.R
Section 10BSection 10B(4)

10B of the Act. However, we note that in the identical facts and circumstances the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mundra Packaging Industries in Tax Appeal No. 615 of 2006 to Tax appeal no.617 of 2006 ITA Nos.367 & 324/Rjt/2015 Deep Recycling Industries A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 vide order dated 11.10.2006 decided the issue

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, JAMNAGAR vs. M/S. DEEP RECYCLING IND.,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2

18
Section 26313
Addition to Income11
ITA 324/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Praveen Verma, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Gokani, A.R
Section 10BSection 10B(4)

10B of the Act. However, we note that in the identical facts and circumstances the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mundra Packaging Industries in Tax Appeal No. 615 of 2006 to Tax appeal no.617 of 2006 ITA Nos.367 & 324/Rjt/2015 Deep Recycling Industries A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 vide order dated 11.10.2006 decided the issue

SHRI RAJKOT VISHASHRIMALI JAIN SAMAJ ,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 256/RJT/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri G.R. Sanghavi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139Section 143Section 143(1)Section 250Section 288

10B in time or fails to furnish the return of income within the due date u/s. 139(1) of the Act. Therefore, section 13(9) does not make reference to any other sub-section of section 11 and only makes reference to section 11(2) of the Act. Notably, section 11(2) of the Act refers to accumulation that

AMBARADI SEVA SAHKARI MANDALI LTD.,AMBARADI , DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT(CPC), BANGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

ITA 186/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. DR &
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(e)

2)(b). The current provisions of section 143(1)(a) allows an Assessing Officer to make prima-facie adjustment of disallowance of deduction claimed u/s. 10AA or under any provisions of Chapter VIA w.e.f. 1st April 2021, if the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section 1 of section 139. This shows the legislative intent while

DHARESHWAR SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD. ,VILLAGE: - DHARESHWAR, TALUKA: - RAJULA, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

ITA 197/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. DR &
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(e)

2)(b). The current provisions of section 143(1)(a) allows an Assessing Officer to make prima-facie adjustment of disallowance of deduction claimed u/s. 10AA or under any provisions of Chapter VIA w.e.f. 1st April 2021, if the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section 1 of section 139. This shows the legislative intent while

SHREE SANALIYA SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD.,LITAL MOTALILIYA SANALIYA, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

ITA 204/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. DR &
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(e)

2)(b). The current provisions of section 143(1)(a) allows an Assessing Officer to make prima-facie adjustment of disallowance of deduction claimed u/s. 10AA or under any provisions of Chapter VIA w.e.f. 1st April 2021, if the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section 1 of section 139. This shows the legislative intent while

AMRUTPUR SEVA SAHKARI MANDALI LTD.,VILLAGE: - AMRUTPUR TALUKA DHARI, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

ITA 203/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. DR &
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(e)

2)(b). The current provisions of section 143(1)(a) allows an Assessing Officer to make prima-facie adjustment of disallowance of deduction claimed u/s. 10AA or under any provisions of Chapter VIA w.e.f. 1st April 2021, if the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section 1 of section 139. This shows the legislative intent while

ATUL AUTO LIMITED,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(1),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeal is allowed

ITA 214/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Rathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 80ISection 80J

2 raised by the Revenue is that disallowance of claim of deduction under Section 80IA being profit from power generating unit of Rs. 86,04,245/-. 9. This claim was rejected by the Ld. AO on the ground that 80IA claim was not been made in the original return filed by the assessee, but only in the revised return filed

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(1), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S ATUL AUTO LIMITED,, SHAPAR.VERAVAL

The appeal is allowed

ITA 251/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Rathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 80ISection 80J

2 raised by the Revenue is that disallowance of claim of deduction under Section 80IA being profit from power generating unit of Rs. 86,04,245/-. 9. This claim was rejected by the Ld. AO on the ground that 80IA claim was not been made in the original return filed by the assessee, but only in the revised return filed

ALIADAR SEVA SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD.,,GIR SOMNATH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, , VERAVAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 472/RJT/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Jul 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 234Section 254Section 80P

2. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -3 Rajkot has erred in law dismissing appeals ex-parte by alleging that the appellant is not interested in put suit the appeal, though the appellant filed written submission on 26/09/2017 in the office of the ld. CIT(A)-3 Rajkot. The deduction u/s.80P of the Act totally disallowing unjustified on facts

ALIDAR SEVA SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD.,,GIR SOMNATH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4,, VERAVAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 473/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Jul 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 234Section 254Section 80P

2. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -3 Rajkot has erred in law dismissing appeals ex-parte by alleging that the appellant is not interested in put suit the appeal, though the appellant filed written submission on 26/09/2017 in the office of the ld. CIT(A)-3 Rajkot. The deduction u/s.80P of the Act totally disallowing unjustified on facts

ALIDAR SEVA SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD.,,GIR SOMNATH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4,, VERAVAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 474/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Jul 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 234Section 254Section 80P

2. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -3 Rajkot has erred in law dismissing appeals ex-parte by alleging that the appellant is not interested in put suit the appeal, though the appellant filed written submission on 26/09/2017 in the office of the ld. CIT(A)-3 Rajkot. The deduction u/s.80P of the Act totally disallowing unjustified on facts

LATE SHANTABEN CHANDRASHANKAR VYAS CHARITABLE TRUST,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CPC),, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is hereby dismissed

ITA 25/RJT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.25/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Asstt. Years: 2018-2019 वष"

For Appellant: Shri J.R. Mankodi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 12A(2)Section 143(1)

10B required under section 12A(1) r.w.r. 17B was not received and furnished with the return of income for the reason that there was no registration under section 12AA of the Act was available during the year. However, as per the proviso to section 12A(2) of the Act it was entitled to claim such benefit exemption under section

GODHAVADAR SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,GODHAVADAR, LILIYA MOTA, AMRELI-365535 vs. THE ADIT (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 315/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P

10B, it was mandatory for the assessee to file a declaration as per the provisions of section 139(1), which is of mandatory nature and directory as well. Further, Ld. Departmental Representative relied on the case of Saffire Garments 28 taxmann.com 27 (Rajkot) (SB), wherein the Rajkot ITAT Special Bench held that proviso to sub-section (1A) of section

THE ITO, WARD-2,, JUNAGADH vs. M/S D. JEWEL,, JUNAGADH

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 15/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedअपील सं./Ita No.15/Rjt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-2014 Income Tax Officer, M/S. D. Jewel, Ward-2, Vs. 1-Shishu Mangal Road, Junagadh. Gandhigram, Junagadh.

For Appellant: Shri Samir Jani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rathi, Sr.D.R
Section 10ASection 115J

10B, this being a technical mistake, should not come in the way by disallowing the otherwise allowable/eligible exemption. [Para 18] Accordingly, there is no infirmity or perversity in the order of the Tribunal so as to call for any interference of the High Court. It is essentially a concurrent finding of fact by the two lower appellate authorities

SHRI SAJADIALI SARDAR PATEL SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD. ,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO WARD-2(1)(2), RAJKOT., RAJKOT

ITA 607/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.607/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Shri Sajadiali Sardar Patel Seva Ito Ward-2, (1) (2) Vs. Sahkari Mandali Ltd. Rajkot – 360001 At Sajadiyali – Rajkot New Aayakar Bhavan, At Sajadiyali Taluka, Race Course Ring Road, Jamkandorana, Dist, Rajkot – 360001 Sajadiyali – Rajkot 360001 Gujrat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaas2374L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav , Ld .Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28 / 01 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22 / 04/2025

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav , Ld .Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80PSection 84

disallowance of the deduction claimed under Section 80P and accept the M.A. filed by the revenue and accordingly amend its own previous order and restore the order of CPC as the provision of act U/s 80 AC (ii) are very clear on this point that for seeking chapter VIA part C deduction, income tax return need to be filed within

THE ITO, WARD-1 (2) (2),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S SRV METALS PRIVATE LIMITED, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 428/RJT/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 43BSection 68

disallowance was made because the assessee had not produced enough details to establish the genuineness of the unsecured loans. 6. The Id. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in not appreciating the factual and legal matrix of the addition made of Rs 1,12,500/- on account of director's remuneration. The Id. CIT(A) ought

BATAVA DEVLI SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,BATAVA DEVLI, TAL. KUNLAVA, DIST. AMRELI. vs. THE ADIT, (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 314/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(ii)Section 143(1)(v)Section 250Section 80Section 80A

10B, it was mandatory for the assessee to file a declaration as per the provisions of section 139(1), which is mandatory nature and directory as well. Further, Ld. Departmental Representative relied on the case of Saffire Garments 28 taxmann.com 27 (Rajkot) (SB), wherein the Rajkot ITAT Special Bench held that proviso to sub-section (1A) of section 10A, which

M/S. PATEL BRASS WORKS PVT. LTD. ,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT-CIRCLE-5, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 60/RJT/2020[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot10 Aug 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri R.D. Lalchandani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 801ASection 80I

disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act. 4. The assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and during appellate proceedings, the assessee has not controverted the fact that deduction u/s 80IA was not claimed in the return of income, and that revised return of income was not filed within the stipulated time

THE ITO, WARD-2,, JUNAGADH vs. M/S D. JEWEL,, JUNAGADH

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 350/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot24 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedअपील सं./Ita No.350/Rjt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-2014 Income Tax Officer, M/S. D. Jewel, Ward-2, Vs. 1-Shishu Mangal Road, Junagadh. Gandhigram, Junagadh.

For Appellant: Shri Hersh Samirbhai Jani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.D.R
Section 10ASection 115JSection 271(1)(c)

2 of 5 Asstt. Year 2013-14 deduction under section 10A of the Act has been discontinued with effect from A.Y. 2012- 13 for the newly undertaking/unit. Therefore, it was not possible for claiming the deduction under this said section. Thus, any deduction claimed under section 10A of the Act cannot be said that it was claimed by the assessee