Search: disallowance | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

13 results for “disallowance”+ Section 115clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai769 Delhi602 Bangalore163 Jaipur139 Chennai138 Ahmedabad134 Hyderabad119 Chandigarh99 Cochin67 Indore62 Pune61 Kolkata56 Raipur56 Surat43 Visakhapatnam42 Guwahati32 Rajkot31 Ranchi29 Cuttack24 Allahabad21 Lucknow13 SC13 Nagpur12 Dehradun9 Patna9 Amritsar8 Jodhpur7 Jabalpur3 Panaji1 Agra1 Varanasi1 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Addition to Income4 Section 803 Section 403 Deduction3 Section 139(5)2 Section 1392 Section 143(3)2 Exemption2 Revision u/s 2632

KERALA STATE BEVERAGES MANUFACTURING AND MARKETING CORPORATION LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1)

Accordingly, the civil appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

C.A. No.-000011-000011 - 2022Supreme Court03 Jan 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40

115/ were disallowed under Section 40(a)(iib) of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant herein has filed

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JINDAL STEEL THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

Appeals are hereby dismissed

C.A. No.-013771-013771 - 2015Supreme Court06 Dec 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

Section 260ASection 80

disallowed by the assessing officer which was affirmed by the first appellate authority i.e., Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). On appeal by the assessee, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which decision has been affirmed by the High Court. The third additional issue relates to what is called carbon credit

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 MUMBAI vs. M/S. ESSAR TELEHOLDINGS LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGER

C.A. No.-002165-002165 - 2012Supreme Court31 Jan 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

Section 10Section 143(2)Section 14A

disallow expenditure incurred to earn exempt income by applying the provisions of newly inserted section 14A of the Act.” 17. By Finance Act, 2002, a statutory provision was also inserted by way of proviso to Section 14A. What was clarified by the Circular have been statutorily engrafted in the proviso to the following effect: “Provided that nothing contained in this

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,NEW DELHI vs. M/S ELI LILLY & COMPANY (INDIA) P.LTD

C.A. No.-005114-005114 - 2007Supreme Court25 Mar 2009

Section 133ASection 192(1)Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(ii)

115-O; or (ii) Second proviso to section 194B, then, such person shall be liable to pay, by way of penalty, a sum equal to the amount of tax which such person failed to 27 deduct or pay as aforesaid. (2) Any penalty imposable under sub-section (1) shall be imposed by the Joint Commissioner.” Penalty not to be imposed

M/S DALMIA POWER LTD. vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals are allowed

C.A. No.-009496-009499 - 2019Supreme Court18 Dec 2019

Bench: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA

Section 139Section 139(5)

disallowed in the hands of DCB Power pertaining to Amalgamating Undertaking 2 under the Income Tax Act, credit of tax under Section 115JB read with Section 115JAA of the Income Tax Act, credit of tax under Section 115JB read with Section 115

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

C.A. No.-008733-008734 - 2018Supreme Court02 Mar 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

disallowance of the deduction under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, end up paying tax of a huge amount, way beyond the commission, resulting in extreme financial hardship. Thus, if section 195 of the Income Tax Act could be construed in a manner so as to avoid such a result, this must be done. Further, he relied

CHANDRAKANT KRISHNARAO PRADHANAND ANOTHER vs. THE COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAYAND OTHERS

- 0Supreme Court11 Aug 1961

For Respondent: THE COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAYAND OTHERS

115 also are not in a favourable position in this regard. If the first sub-section requires that fresh licences to work as Custom House Agents be obtained, the distinction between permanent and temporary licences ceases to be material. No part of s.202 was challenged as being void or ultra vires. In these petitions, only the Rules &ire challenged

NARENDRAKUMAR J. MODI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUJARAT II,AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal fails and is dismissed with

- 0Supreme Court04 Aug 1976

For Respondent: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUJARAT II,AHMEDABAD

disallowed the 114 claim under section 25A of the Income-tax Act, 1922. It is asserted that in the year 1961 a suit for partition had also been filed and the City Civil Court Ahmedabad passed a decree for partition on June 30, 1965. In an appeal filed before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner from the order of the Income

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MADRAS vs. R.M. CHIDAMBARAM PILLAI ETC

- 0Supreme Court17 Nov 1976

For Respondent: R.M. CHIDAMBARAM PILLAI ETC

Section 10(4)(b)

115 The scheme of the Act, eyeing it with special reference to s. 10(4)(b) and 16(1) (b), designateIs employee’s salary as profit, where the servant is none other than a partner i.e., co-owner of the business.If such be the rationale of the relevant provisions, the key to the solution of the problem is within easy

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,BOMBAY vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BOMBAY

The appeal is allowed

- 0Supreme Court19 Feb 1996

For Respondent: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BOMBAY

Section 256(1)Section 44Section 7

Disallowance of the balance of the tax refund was quite in order because they did not come out of the assets which were included in the surplus of the earlier inter valuation period." The above-quoted question was referred to the High- Court for its decision at the instance of the assessee Corporation, under Section 256(1) of the Income

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

C.A. No.-021762-021762 - 2017Supreme Court19 Oct 2022

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 12AA(1) of the IT Act, on 18.05.1979 and is engaged in the activity of promotion of the export of all kind of ready-made garments, knitwear, and garments made of leather, jute and hemp. It does not per se engage in any activity for profit, and its mandate is to ensure that Indian apparel manufacturers, are given forums

WIPRO FINANCE LTD. vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed

C.A. No.-006677-006677 - 2008Supreme Court12 Apr 2022

Section 143(1)(a)Section 254Section 37Section 43A

115 of IT Rules and further the liability is real as per terms of the agreement with CDC. Just because the liability is payable in future does not covert the actual liability into contingent liability as held by the Supreme Court in Calcutta Co Ltd. vs. CIT – 37 ITR 1 and Bharat Earth Movers

M/S MERIDIAN INDUSTRIES LTD. vs. COMMR.OF CENTRAL EXCISE

C.A. No.-004112-004112 - 2007Supreme Court27 Oct 2015

Section 35B of the Act. The Commissioner of Central Excise preferred the appeal as directed by the Central Board of Excise & Customs against his own Order-in-Original No.32/2002-Commr. dated 21.06.2002 before the Tribunal. 5. The Tribunal allowed the appeal preferred by the Commissioner of Central Excise vide its decision dated 17.07.2007. Perusal of the decision indicates following thought process