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.

72 results for “disallowance”+ Section 40clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai7,732Delhi6,610Chennai2,462Bangalore2,363Kolkata2,258Ahmedabad1,078Hyderabad833Jaipur678Pune601Indore436Surat380Chandigarh359Raipur263Rajkot245Karnataka240Cochin237Nagpur226Amritsar182Visakhapatnam178Cuttack138Lucknow135Panaji90Guwahati88Allahabad73Ranchi72Patna68Telangana68Calcutta65SC57Jodhpur51Agra46Dehradun43Jabalpur36Kerala30Varanasi28Orissa5Punjab & Haryana5Rajasthan4Gauhati2Himachal Pradesh1J&K1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Tripura1Uttarakhand1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Disallowance63Addition to Income48Section 4044Depreciation43Section 14A34Section 271(1)(c)33Section 143(3)30Section 234A30Section 32(2)29Section 35E

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 under section 40(a)(i)/(ia) of the Act. The disallowance under section 40 is with respect to same

Showing 1–20 of 72 · Page 1 of 4

28
Section 271C24
Penalty14

K M MEMORIAL HOSPITAL & RESERCH CENTRE (P) LTD,BOKARO vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, HAZARIBAG

In the result, this ground of appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 19/RAN/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi29 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

Section 40(a)(ia) are not applicable in this case. Even if the appellant was liable to deduct TDS then only 30% of the amount can be disallowed

M/S ANJENEYA ISPAT LTD.,SARAIKELA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONE OF INCOME TAX, CIRCELE-1, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 75/RAN/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.75/Ran/2022 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Anjeneya Ispat Ltd.…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant 29, Rain Basera, Sanjay Nagar Colony, Adityapur, Saraikela, Jharkhand- 831013. [Pan: Aagca1031N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Jamshedpur.….....…..…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 06, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Jamshedpur (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 25.09.2017 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2019–20 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹62,64,116. The Case Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny. During The Relevant Previous Year, A Survey Operation Under Section 133A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Was Conducted At The Business Premises Of The Assessee On 16.02.2019. Subsequently, Statutory Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued. In Response Thereto, The Assessee Appeared From Time To Time & Furnished Various Details & Documents As Called For. The Same Were Examined & Discussed By The Assessing Officer During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings. During

Section 10(23)Section 133ASection 133A(3)Section 145ASection 14ASection 250Section 40Section 69Section 69C

disallowance of ₹14,38,359, it was contended that the CIT(A) committed a serious legal error in changing the applicable section from section 14A to section 40

M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LIMITED ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1 , DHANBAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal by the assessee is partly allowed as well as cross-objection by the assessee is allowed

ITA 290/RAN/2017[08-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi31 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 31(1)Section 32(1)Section 32(2)

disallowance made by ld. AO to Rs. 22,53,48,000/- on the grounds that TDS was not deducted in violation of provision of section 40

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal by the assessee is partly allowed as well as cross-objection by the assessee is allowed

ITA 298/RAN/2017[08-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi31 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 31(1)Section 32(1)Section 32(2)

disallowance made by ld. AO to Rs. 22,53,48,000/- on the grounds that TDS was not deducted in violation of provision of section 40

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

ITA 300/RAN/2017[09-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(2)

40(a)(ia)", "Section 37(1)", "Rule 46A"], "issues": "The core issues revolved around the allowability of unabsorbed depreciation, disallowance

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

ITA 294/RAN/2017[12-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(2)

sections": ["10(34)", "14A", "32(2)", "40(a)(ia)", "46A"], "issues": "Disallowance of unabsorbed depreciation, contractual expenses, expenses relating to exempt

SRI KRISHNA NUTRITIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 261/RAN/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Jun 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 194CSection 40

Section 40(a)(ia) and had disallowed the payments to the three labour sardars. It was the submission that on appeal

SRI KRISHNA NUTRITIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 263/RAN/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Jun 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 194CSection 40

Section 40(a)(ia) and had disallowed the payments to the three labour sardars. It was the submission that on appeal

SRI KRISHNA NUTRITIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 262/RAN/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Jun 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 194CSection 40

Section 40(a)(ia) and had disallowed the payments to the three labour sardars. It was the submission that on appeal

RAJESH JALAN,DHANBAD vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1, DHANBAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in full

ITA 498/RAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 68Section 69A

40,000/- made under Section 68 of the Act. 8. Addition under Section 69A of the Act ₹20,86,500/- (Introduction of Capital) The Assessing Officer further noted that the assessee had introduced total capital of ₹27,02,500/- in his proprietary business during the year, of which ₹6,16,000/- was through bank and the balance

DCIT CIR-1 , RANCHI vs. M/S CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD, RANCHI

ITA 178/RAN/2017[12-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Jan 2026
Section 14ASection 234ASection 35E

Section 14A of the\nAct was in existence and the some disallowances were called for. It was\nsubmitted that the disallowance should be proportionate to the investment\nmade.\n33. In rejoinder, Id. AR submitted that the bonds were on account of\nsecuritization of the debts. It was the submission that in the earlier years\nthe Id.CIT(A) has held this

M/S. BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED,DHANBAD vs. JT. CIT, TDS,, DHANBAD

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

ITA 75/RAN/2024[08-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi29 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 194ASection 201Section 271CSection 273BSection 40

disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) has been made by Assessing Officer, in assessment proceedings, the same amount could not be considered as an amount covered by provisions of section

M/S. BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED,DHANBAD vs. JCIT TDS, DHANBAD

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

ITA 77/RAN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi29 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 194ASection 201Section 271CSection 273BSection 40

disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) has been made by Assessing Officer, in assessment proceedings, the same amount could not be considered as an amount covered by provisions of section

M/S. BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED,,DHANBAD vs. JCIT, TDS CIRCLE,, DHANBAD

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

ITA 76/RAN/2024[09-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi29 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 194ASection 201Section 271CSection 273BSection 40

disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) has been made by Assessing Officer, in assessment proceedings, the same amount could not be considered as an amount covered by provisions of section

ACIT CIRCLE-1 , DHANBAD vs. M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LTD , DHANBAD

ITA 302/RAN/2017[11-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(2)

sections": [ "Sec. 32(2)", "Sec. 14A", "Rule 8D", "Sec. 40(a)(ia)", "Rule 46A" ], "issues": "Disallowance of unabsorbed depreciation, contractual

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

ITA 293/RAN/2017[11-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(2)

sections": [ "32(2)", "14A", "Rule 8D(2)(ii)", "Rule 8D(2)(iii)", "40(a)(ia)", "10(34)" ], "issues": "Disallowance of unabsorbed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI, RANCHI vs. SHRI VIJAY PRASAD, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 35/RAN/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi11 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Central Circle-1, Ranchi Shri Vijay Prasad Flat No. 202, Madhusudan Sir Vs Krishanapuri, Dimna Road Mango, Jamshedpur-831012. Pan: Ailpp 0228 L (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.19/Ran/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 35/Ran/2021) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Vijay Prasad Acit, Central Circle-1, Ranchi Flat No. 202, Madhusudan Sir Vs Krishanapuri, Dimna Road Mango, Jamshedpur-831012. Pan: Ailpp 0228 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.12.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma: Jm This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-3, Patna Dated 09.03.2021 Against Same Impugned Order A Cross-Objection Also Filed By The Assessee Being C.O. No. 19/Ran/2021. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The A.Y. 2012-13 On 11.09.2012 Showing Total Income Of Rs. 14,32,834/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & The Assessment In The Case Of Assessee Was Completed U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 28.03.2014 Determining Total Income Of Rs.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 194(7)Section 194CSection 40

section 40(a)(ia) u/s 194C r.w.s. 206AA of the income-tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the ld. AO disallowed such

DEVPRABHA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LTD.,,DHANBAD vs. PCIT, DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 27/RAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) Devprabha Construction Private Ltd., P.C.I.T., Dev Villa, Behind Radha Swamy Arcade, Dhanbad, Vs. Saraidhela, Dhanbad-828127. Aayakar Bhawan, Luby Pan No. Aaecb 2652 A Circular Road, Dhanbad-826001 (Jharkhand) Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263

40(A)(2b) and the vehicles/ machinery ownership details, we would like to submit as under:- a) That this issue was duly enquired and looked into at the time of original assessment which can be verified from the 142(1) notice, copy of which is at Page 161 - 165 of the paper book and for ready reference, a copy

CCL LTD ,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

ITA 32/RAN/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Jan 2026
Section 14ASection 234ASection 35E

Section 14A of the\nAct was in existence and the some disallowances were called for. It was\nsubmitted that the disallowance should be proportionate to the investment\nmade.\n33. In rejoinder, Id. AR submitted that the bonds were on account of\nsecuritization of the debts. It was the submission that in the earlier years\nthe Id.CIT(A) has held this