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.

3 results for “disallowance”+ Section 43Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai69 Karnataka51 Delhi27 Chennai16 Telangana15 Bangalore13 Kolkata9 Jaipur5 Ahmedabad3 Hyderabad3 Pune3 SC3 Surat3 Visakhapatnam2 Rajkot1 Jabalpur1 Jodhpur1 Raipur1

Key Topics

Section 408 Section 143(2)2 Section 36(1)(iii)2 Deduction2 Addition to Income2

M/S MUNJAL SALES CORPORATION vs. COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,LUDHIANA

C.A. No.-001378-001378 - 2008Supreme Court19 Feb 2008

For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax,Ludhiana & Anr

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40

43C essentially deal with Business Income. Sections 30 to 38 deal with Deductions. Sections 40A and 43B deal with Business Disallowances

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S WOODWARD GOVERNOR INDIA P. LTD

C.A. No.-002206-002206 - 2009Supreme Court08 Apr 2009

Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)

Section 37(1)

Section 43(1)

disallowed the deduction/debit. This fact is important. It indicates the double standards adopted by the Department. 11. The dispute in this batch of civil appeals centers around the year(s) in which deduction would be admissible for the increased liability under Section 37(1). 12. We quote hereinbelow Section 28(i), Section 29 Section 37(1) and Section

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) 2 vs. M/S MAHAGUN REALTORS (P) LTD

The appeal is allowed, in the above terms, without order on costs

C.A. No.-002716-002716 - 2022Supreme Court05 Apr 2022

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 276C

disallowed in the subsequent year, in the case of the then transferee company. The decision of the Delhi High Court, in Spice (supra), after discussing the decision in Saraswati Syndicate, went on to explain why assessing an amalgamating company, without framing the order in the name of the transferee company is fatal: “10. Section 481 of the Companies Act provides