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.

2 results for “disallowance”+ Section 115Jclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai163Delhi114Kolkata47Ahmedabad33Chennai13Jaipur11Surat11Bangalore10Pune7Hyderabad5Indore3Karnataka3Guwahati3Nagpur3Cochin2Visakhapatnam2Rajkot2Telangana1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 10A21Section 115J4Section 271(1)(c)2Exemption2Deduction2Disallowance2

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

disallowed outrightly. Page 11 of 14 Asstt. Year 2013-14 The mentioning of section 80-IB was only clerical mistake and with all fairness as per the facts and circumstances and as per the previous claims in tax calculation under section 115J

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)

disallowed outrightly. The mentioning of section 80-IB was only clerical mistake and with all fairness as per the facts and circumstances and as per the previous claims in tax calculation under section 115J