Search: disallowance

3 results for “disallowance”+ Section 270A(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 270A19 Section 139(4)5 Section 143(3)3 Penalty3 Section 372

M/S EKLAVYA ESTATE PVT.LTD.,RANCHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RANCHI, RANCHI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 258/RAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi03 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaym/S Eklavya Estate Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T., H-95, Harmu Housing Colony, Central Circle-2, Vs. Ranchi-834002 (Jharkhand) Ranchi. Pan No. Aabce 5815 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 133ASection 270ASection 274

1) That this is an appeal is against the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) Patna dated 29/12/2023 wherein the penalty imposed U/s 270A for Rs. 2,83,959/- was confirmed. 2) That in the grounds of appeal we have challenged the initiation of penalty proceedings vide notice dated 13/04/2021 (copy of which is attached herewith) to the extent that

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMSHEDPUR vs. URANIUM CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 205/RAN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayd.C.I.T., Uranium Corporation Of India Jamshedpur. Limited, Vs. Turamardie Mines, Sundar Nagar, East Singhbhum-832107 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aaacu 2207 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 135Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(2)(g)Section 37Section 37(1)

1. On the facts and circumstances, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty levies u/s 270A of the I.T.Act, 1961 by observing that the disallowance has no adverse impact on revenue without appreciating the fact that the assessee company had claimed wrong expenses during the year under consideration in contravention to explanation 2 of section

JHARKHAND URJAA SANCHARAN NIGAM LIMITED,RANCHI vs. ITO WARD-1(4), RANCHI

In the result, grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 49/RAN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) Jharkhand Urjaa Sancharan Nigam I.T.O., Limited, Ward 1(4), Vs. Sldc Building, Ranchi-834002. Ranchi. Pan No. Aadcj 3112 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 270A

disallowed the loss claimed by the assessee company of Rs. 1,22,04,26,668/- to be carry forward on the ground that the return was a belated return filed under Section 139(4) of the Act. The Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings under Section 270A