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.

12 results for “disallowance”+ Section 1aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai933Delhi917Bangalore517Chennai351Kolkata208Ahmedabad167Jaipur144Hyderabad138Pune115Raipur95Cochin68Karnataka54Indore54Chandigarh53Surat43Cuttack30Nagpur29Rajkot26Panaji25SC20Visakhapatnam20Jodhpur19Lucknow18Guwahati14Ranchi12Telangana10Jabalpur10Agra8Patna6Varanasi6Amritsar5Dehradun3Kerala2Punjab & Haryana2Allahabad2Orissa1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 20113Section 4012Deduction11TDS9Section 801B8Survey u/s 133A8Section 143(3)5Section 143(1)(a)4Section 139(1)4Addition to Income

SURYA REALCON PRIVATE LIMITED,SARAIDHELA, DHANBAD vs. DCIT, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, DHANBAD

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4/RAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)(a)Section 801Section 801B

1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) has not been allowed deduction under Section 80IB of the Act amounting to Surya Realcon P Ltd. Vs DCIT ₹ 27,45,349/- on the ground that the return was not filed under Section 139(1) of the Act and was a belated return and therefore, the assessee

SURYA REALCON PRIVATE LIMITED,SARAIDHELA, DHANBAD vs. DCIT, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, DHANBAD

4
Section 139(4)2
Section 1392

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5/RAN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)(a)Section 801Section 801B

1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) has not been allowed deduction under Section 80IB of the Act amounting to Surya Realcon P Ltd. Vs DCIT ₹ 27,45,349/- on the ground that the return was not filed under Section 139(1) of the Act and was a belated return and therefore, the assessee

ITO, TDS,, RANCHI vs. M/S. CHINNAMASTIKA CEMENT & ISPAT LTD.,, RAMGARH

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 17/RAN/2022[15-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi27 May 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 133Section 133A

Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act by holding that "Admittedly, in this case despite making contrary observation, the ITO/TDS has accepted the transportation payment as genuine that is why he has computed the TDS liability on those payments u/s 201(1) and interest u/s 201(1A). Therefore, it is not in dispute that the transportation payments has been

ITO, TDS, RANCHI, RANCHI vs. M/S. CHHINAMASTIKA CEMENT & ISPAT PVT. LTD.,, RAMGARH

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 18/RAN/2022[16-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi27 May 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 133Section 133A

Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act by holding that "Admittedly, in this case despite making contrary observation, the ITO/TDS has accepted the transportation payment as genuine that is why he has computed the TDS liability on those payments u/s 201(1) and interest u/s 201(1A). Therefore, it is not in dispute that the transportation payments has been

M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 130/RAN/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No.130/Ran/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Bharat Coking Coal Ltd…………..…...…......................……...…..….. Appellant Finance Directorate, Ground Floor, Koyla Bhawan, Koyla Nagar, Dhanbad-826005. [Pan: Aaacb7934M] Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Dhanbad…..……………………….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri M. K. Choudhary, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Saumyajit Das Gupta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 26, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 20, 2022 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20.09.2017 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Dhanbad [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

Section 143(3)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 244ASection 250Section 40

disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) on account of non- deduction of TDS on interest expenditure amounting to Rs.132,20,00,000/-. The ld. Counsel has further submitted that an order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) dated 20.03.2018 was passed by the Assessing Officer raising TDS demand of Rs.13,22,00,000/- and interest of Rs.6,21,34,000/- totalling

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANCHI vs. SPICA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, RANCHI

In the result, all these appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 226/RAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 201

Section 201/201(1A) of the Act by the Assessing Officer on account of non-deduction of TDS on the labour payments. It was a submission that before the ld. CIT(A), it was specifically submitted that there was a survey on the premises of the assessee and in the course of survey, the labour charges had been examined

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANCHI vs. SPICA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, RANCHI

In the result, all these appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 229/RAN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 201

Section 201/201(1A) of the Act by the Assessing Officer on account of non-deduction of TDS on the labour payments. It was a submission that before the ld. CIT(A), it was specifically submitted that there was a survey on the premises of the assessee and in the course of survey, the labour charges had been examined

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANCHI vs. SPICA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, RANCHI

In the result, all these appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 228/RAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 201

Section 201/201(1A) of the Act by the Assessing Officer on account of non-deduction of TDS on the labour payments. It was a submission that before the ld. CIT(A), it was specifically submitted that there was a survey on the premises of the assessee and in the course of survey, the labour charges had been examined

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANCHI vs. SPICA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, RANCHI

In the result, all these appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 225/RAN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 201

Section 201/201(1A) of the Act by the Assessing Officer on account of non-deduction of TDS on the labour payments. It was a submission that before the ld. CIT(A), it was specifically submitted that there was a survey on the premises of the assessee and in the course of survey, the labour charges had been examined

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANCHI vs. SPICA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, RANCHI

In the result, all these appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 224/RAN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 201

Section 201/201(1A) of the Act by the Assessing Officer on account of non-deduction of TDS on the labour payments. It was a submission that before the ld. CIT(A), it was specifically submitted that there was a survey on the premises of the assessee and in the course of survey, the labour charges had been examined

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANCHI vs. SPICA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, RANCHI

In the result, all these appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 227/RAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 201

Section 201/201(1A) of the Act by the Assessing Officer on account of non-deduction of TDS on the labour payments. It was a submission that before the ld. CIT(A), it was specifically submitted that there was a survey on the premises of the assessee and in the course of survey, the labour charges had been examined

DCIT CIR-3(1), JAMSHEDPUR vs. M/S YASH INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED , JAMSHEDPUR

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

ITA 155/RAN/2017[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Nov 2022

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

section 131 of I.T.Act, 1961 of Shri Raj Kumar Agarwal, Director of the assessee company in which he confirmed and accepted that the short term capital loss was bogus. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Ld. CIT(A) is justified on focusing at the sentence that "he was successful in bringing back his own accounted