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.

16 results for “disallowance”+ Section 234clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai863Delhi862Bangalore410Chennai213Kolkata176Jaipur98Ahmedabad94Chandigarh46Pune44Indore36Hyderabad34Surat32Raipur27Cuttack25Lucknow21Karnataka18Nagpur18Guwahati17Visakhapatnam16Rajkot16Ranchi12Amritsar10Cochin5Varanasi4Telangana4Patna3SC3Jodhpur3Jabalpur2Dehradun2Calcutta2Agra1Rajasthan1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 80P35Addition to Income11Disallowance10Section 2346Section 2546Section 116Deduction6Section 36(1)(iii)5Section 13(1)(b)5Section 80

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

disallowed deduction under section 80P on interest income of Rs. 39,11,617/-. Appeal to the CIT(A)-3 did not bring any relief to the appellant. 3. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in charging interest u/s. 234

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

5
Section 139(1)4
Penalty4
ITA 473/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed
ITAT Rajkot
13 Jul 2022
AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 234Section 254Section 80P

disallowed deduction under section 80P on interest income of Rs. 39,11,617/-. Appeal to the CIT(A)-3 did not bring any relief to the appellant. 3. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in charging interest u/s. 234

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

disallowed deduction under section 80P on interest income of Rs. 39,11,617/-. Appeal to the CIT(A)-3 did not bring any relief to the appellant. 3. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in charging interest u/s. 234

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S KUTCH SALT & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD.,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 236/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 to 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. M/s. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAACT1769L (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 366 /Rjt/2017 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner of Income

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. M/S KUTCH SALT & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD.,, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 366/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 to 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. M/s. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAACT1769L (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 366 /Rjt/2017 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner of Income

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S KUTCH SALT & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD.,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 234/RJT/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 to 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. M/s. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAACT1769L (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 366 /Rjt/2017 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner of Income

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S KUTCH SALT & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD.,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 235/RJT/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 to 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. M/s. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAACT1769L (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 366 /Rjt/2017 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner of Income

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S KUTCH SALT & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD.,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 233/RJT/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 to 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. M/s. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAACT1769L (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 366 /Rjt/2017 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner of Income

CLASSIC NETWORKS PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for Assessment

ITA 218/RJT/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Sept 2022AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 153ASection 80I

disallowing the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA(4) in respect of following infrastructure projects undertaken by the appellant: Sr. No. of project referred by CIT (Appeals) Name of the project 5 Nabard Package Gondal 6 Dwarka Okha Km. 234 to 239 7 Pravasipath Dwarka Okha 242 to 247 8 Sardargadh Zinzarda Road ITA Nos. 218/Rjt/2015 & 204/Rjt/2015 (Classic Networks

CHAKARGADH SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,CHAKARGADH SEVA, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT(CPC),, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 187/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 30Section 80Section 801

disallowed the deduction stating that the appellant is not entitled to deduction on the ground that the appellant filed the return of income beyond the due date mentioned in Sec. 139(1) of the Act. In this regard, Section 80AC of the Act is reproduced below:- Section 80AC Where in computing the total income of an assessee of any previous

THE ITO, WARD-1 (1) (1),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. AMIT COTTON INDUSTRIES,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

ITA 431/RJT/2015[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot01 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vidyasagar S. Ubale, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 69C

234, Plot 709 7th Floor, Aayakar No. 11, At: Shapar Veraval, Bhavan Race Course Rind Tal: Kotda Sangani, Rajkot Road, Rajkot [PAN No.AAEFA6720D] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Deepak Rindani, AR. Respondent by : Shri Vidyasagar S. Ubale, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 08/02/2022 Date of Pronouncement 04/03/2022 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal

SHREE MALIYA KADVA PATEL SEVA SAMAJ,,JUNAGADH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3),, VERAVAL

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed in above terms

ITA 187/RJT/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Jun 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Rathi, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 13(1)(b)Section 250(6)

disallowance of expenditure made by the AO shall have no relevance and cannot result into positive income at all. 10. Corpus donations are capital receipts, irrespective of whether a trust enjoys benefit of sec. 11 and 12 or not. Case Law Compilation Case Law Citation Page No. Hamdard National Foundation (2020) 82 ITR (Trib) 164 127-133 India Delhi Prakash

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT vs. SHRI PANKAJ CHIMANLAL LODHIYA, RAJKOT

ITA 48/RJT/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

disallowance made by assessing\nofficer is explanation given by assessee of dr/cr entries in cash and metals ledger.\n18.2 According to which each Dr. entry in the metal ledger is quantity released by SB\nand each Cr. entry is quantity lifted by the assessee. Since the order entry and\nreversal entry thereof was debited and credited in the metal ledger

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT vs. SHRI PANKAJ CHIMANLAL LODHIYA, RAJKOT

Appeals are dismissed, Assessee's appeals are partly allowed

ITA 47/RJT/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

disallowance made by assessing\nofficer is explanation given by assessee of dr/cr entries in cash and metals ledger.\n18.2 According to which each Dr. entry in the metal ledger is quantity released by SB\nand each Cr. entry is quantity lifted by the assessee. Since the order entry and\nreversal entry thereof was debited and credited in the metal ledger

ANUP A. SHAH,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 106/RJT/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Mar 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 106/Rjt/2017 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Asstt. Years: 2005-2006 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A

disallowance of interest Rs.5,51,313/- u/s.40A(20(b) Made on a/c of capital expenditure Rs.18,745/- Made on a/c of non verified expenses Rs.13,100/- Made on a/c. of personal expenses Rs.18,100/- Made on a/c. of excess depreciation Rs.10,208/- Total confirmed additions Rs.21,71,700/- 8. Accordingly, the AO issued fresh show notice proposing to levy

SHREE AMRELI GURJAR SAGAR GNATI TRUST.,AMRELI vs. THE ACIT-CPC,, BANGLORE

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 34/RJT/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot12 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Written SubmissionFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 234A

Section 143(1) of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. At the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee, but the written submissions were filed by the Ld. AR which is taken on record as submissions of the Assessee. Besides this