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.

26 results for “TDS”+ Section 88clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,361Mumbai1,251Bangalore593Chennai481Kolkata290Hyderabad198Ahmedabad172Indore171Jaipur131Pune131Karnataka124Raipur103Chandigarh97Visakhapatnam82Cochin75Ranchi37Jodhpur31Lucknow31Surat26Guwahati25Nagpur23Rajkot22Agra21Patna20Amritsar18Kerala18Cuttack14Telangana13Dehradun10SC7Jabalpur5Calcutta3Allahabad2Gauhati1Punjab & Haryana1Varanasi1Panaji1

Key Topics

Addition to Income23Disallowance14Section 143(3)13Section 25012Deduction10Section 689Section 80P(2)(a)8Section 80P(2)(c)8TDS8Section 147

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, SURAT vs. M/S. KEJRIWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1509/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 131Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 68

TDS, Circle- Ranchi under section 131 (1)(d) of the Act to conduct enquiries in case of the lenders based at Ranchi. The said officers have sent the enquiry reports, which are framing part of assessment order. The findings of the AO as per chart is as under: S. Name of the Alleged Findings of enquiry N. Lenders Loan(includi

JAVAHARLAL S DHARIWAL,SURAT vs. ITO WARD 1(2)(2), SURAT

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2

7
Section 271(1)(c)7
Section 406

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 203/SRT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.203/Srt/2020 (Ay 2013-14) (Hearing In Physical Court) Javaharlal S Dhariwal Income Tax Officer, 886 Old Gidc, Nr. Bank Of Ward-1(2)(2), Surat-395001 Vs Baroda, Katargam, Surat- 395004 Pan No: Aaypd 4207 G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Mahul Shah, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 02.02.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 28.04.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, Surat [For Short To As “Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 30.01.2020 For Assessment Year 2013- 14, Which In Turn Arises Out Assessment Order Passed By Income-Tax Officer-Ward-1(2)(2), Surat/Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 12.02.2016. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Making A Disallowance Of Rs.3,45,378/- U/S 40(A)(Ia) Of The It Act 1961. Javaharlal S Dhariwal 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Partly Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer By Sustaining The Disallowance Of Rs.2,46,915/- Out Of Total Disallowance Of Rs.4,93,830/- On Account Of Machinery Salary Expenses. 3. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Making Addition Of Rs.3,95,466/- Being Interest Expenses Claimed U/S 57 Of The Act.

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 254(1)Section 40Section 57

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 12.02.2016. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in making a disallowance

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), SURAT vs. THE SURAT DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, ground No.6 raised by the assessee, is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4/SRT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.590/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) The Surat District Co.Op. Bank Ltd., Vs. The Acit, Circle-2(2), Shri Pramodbhai Desai Sahakar Bhavan, Surat. J. P. Road, Athwa Gate, Surat – 395001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaat2985Q (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4/Srt/2020 Assessment Year: (2011-12) The Dcit, Circle-2(2), Vs. The Surat District Co.Op. Bank Ltd., Surat. Shri Pramodbhai Desai Sahakar Bhavan, J. P. Road, Athwa Gate, Surat – 395001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaat2985Q (Assessee) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40

TDS on the same. (v) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in Law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of expenses towards Employees contribution to provident fund/shortfall Rs.29,00,000/- without appreciating the fact that the assessee is using this fund to cover up shortfall and pay employees contribution which is in fact

THE SURAT DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD,SURAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), SURAT, SURAT

In the result, ground No.6 raised by the assessee, is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 590/SRT/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.590/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) The Surat District Co.Op. Bank Ltd., Vs. The Acit, Circle-2(2), Shri Pramodbhai Desai Sahakar Bhavan, Surat. J. P. Road, Athwa Gate, Surat – 395001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaat2985Q (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4/Srt/2020 Assessment Year: (2011-12) The Dcit, Circle-2(2), Vs. The Surat District Co.Op. Bank Ltd., Surat. Shri Pramodbhai Desai Sahakar Bhavan, J. P. Road, Athwa Gate, Surat – 395001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaat2985Q (Assessee) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40

TDS on the same. (v) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in Law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of expenses towards Employees contribution to provident fund/shortfall Rs.29,00,000/- without appreciating the fact that the assessee is using this fund to cover up shortfall and pay employees contribution which is in fact

AKSHAR GEMS,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR.3(2), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 24/SRT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.24/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Virtual Court Hearing) Akshar Gems, Assistant Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Shreeji Diamond Apartment, Vs. Income-Tax, Circle-3(2), Nandu Doshi Ni Wadi, Vastadevdi Road, Aaykar Bhavan Nr.Majura Katargam, Surat – 395004 Gate, Opp. New Civil Hospital, Surat-395001 (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aarfa3697A Assessee By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27/12/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 30/01/2023

Section 195Section 195(6)Section 271Section 274

TDS as per the provisions of the Act. It is worthwhile to mention that Section 195(6) has been amended during the year under consideration i.e. with effect from 01.06.2015 which is reproduced as given below: 'The person responsible for paying to a non-resident, not being a company, or to a foreign company, any sum, whether or not chargeable

SATHAIYA GANAPATHY,PUDUKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD 1, BARDOLI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 329/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.329 & 330/Srt/2025 Assessment Years: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Sathaiya Ganapathy, Vs. Ito, Ts No.4114, South 3 Rd Street, Ward – 1, Pukukottai, Tamil Nadu - 622001 Bardoli "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahbpg2414Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mayank A. Ogriwala, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

Section 111ASection 16Section 24Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

section 24 of Income Tax Act while assessing the total income of the assessee. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as learned Assessing Officer have erred in not allowing deduction under chapter VIA of Rs.1,50,000 while assessing the total income

SATHAIYA GANAPATHY,PUDUKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD 1 , BARDOLI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 330/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.329 & 330/Srt/2025 Assessment Years: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Sathaiya Ganapathy, Vs. Ito, Ts No.4114, South 3 Rd Street, Ward – 1, Pukukottai, Tamil Nadu - 622001 Bardoli "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahbpg2414Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mayank A. Ogriwala, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

Section 111ASection 16Section 24Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

section 24 of Income Tax Act while assessing the total income of the assessee. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as learned Assessing Officer have erred in not allowing deduction under chapter VIA of Rs.1,50,000 while assessing the total income

MADHVI AJITKUMAR RANKA ,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 124/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.124/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Madhvi Ajitkumar Ranka, Vs. Acit, 88, Sunder Nagar, Jamalpore, Navsari Circle, Navsari – 396445 Navsari "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahfpr5791K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Darshit J. Naik, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

Section 250Section 253(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 68

88, Sunder Nagar, Jamalpore, Navsari Circle, Navsari – 396445 Navsari "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AHFPR5791K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Darshit J. Naik, CA Respondent by Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 01/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 26/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM: This appeal by the assessee emanates from the order passed under section

AMITKUMAR AGRAWAL,SURAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2), SURAT

In the result, ground No.4 is partly allowed

ITA 25/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 25/Srt/2024 (Ay 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Amitkumar Agrawal Assistant Commissioner Of Income- I-2474-75, Millennium Textile Tax, Circle-1(2), Surat, बनाम Market, Ring Road, Room No.213, 2Nd Floor, Vs Surat-395 002 Aaykar Bhavan, Opp. [Pan : Ajtpa 4052 E] New Civil Hospital, Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 254(1)

88,573/- and in AY.2017-18 of more than Rs.6.00 lakhs. The assessee furnished their confirmation and complete ITR. The ld. CIT(A) without discarding such submission, confirmed the addition of their loan amounts. No investigation of fact was carried out either by ld. CIT(A) or by AO. Once the assessee discharged his primary onus, in term of section

DHANUBEN RAMANBHAI SONAVADIYA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(3)(6), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 470/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.470/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 (Hybrid Hearing) Dhanuben Ramanbhai Income Tax Officer Ward-2(3)(7), बनाम/ Sonavadiya Surat, Anavil Business Center, Vs. A-1/102, Omkar Residency, Adajan Hazira Road, Adajan, Palanpur, Mahidharpura, Surat-395 007 Surat- 395 009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ebeps 7022 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Appellant By Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 29/07/2025 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 27/08/2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 08.04.2024 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) u/s 143(3) of the Act dated

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT vs. NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL, SURAT

ITA 164/SRT/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2025AY 2020-21
Section 147Section 250

88,04,101/- without appreciating the\nfacts that in real estate market like in Surat, to evade the taxation, the\ntransactions are made on Plain papers/satakhat without registration of sale\ndeed.\nIt is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and\nthat the AO may be restored to the above extent

CHANCHALBEN DAHYABHAI PATEL,DAMAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAMAN

ITA 1037/SRT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Jun 2025AY 2014-15
Section 147Section 250

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act') by\nthe National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax\n(Appeals) [in short, “NFAC/CIT(E)”] all dated 13.08.2024, for the Assessment\nYears (AY) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16, which in turn arose out of\nassessment orders passed by Assessing Officer (in short

CHANCHALBEN DAHYABHAI PATEL,DAMAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAMAN

ITA 1035/SRT/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Jun 2025AY 2011-2012
Section 147Section 250

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act') by\nthe National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax\n(Appeals) [in short, “NFAC/CIT(E)”] all dated 13.08.2024, for the Assessment\nYears (AY) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16, which in turn arose out of\nassessment orders passed by Assessing Officer (in short

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT vs. NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL, SURAT

ITA 163/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
Section 147Section 250

88,04,101/- without appreciating the\nfacts that in real estate market like in Surat, to evade the taxation, the\ntransactions are made on Plain papers/satakhat without registration of sale\ndeed.\nIt is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and\nthat the AO may be restored to the above extent.”\n8.\nGrounds

NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT

ITA 136/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
Section 147Section 250

88,04,101/- without appreciating the\nfacts that in real estate market like in Surat, to evade the taxation, the\ntransactions are made on Plain papers/satakhat without registration of sale\ndeed.\nIt is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and\nthat the AO may be restored to the above extent.\"\nGrounds

CHANCHALBEN DAHYABHAI PATEL,DAMAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAMAN

ITA 1038/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Jun 2025AY 2015-16
Section 147Section 250

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act') by\nthe National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax\n(Appeals) [in short, “NFAC/CIT(E)”] all dated 13.08.2024, for the Assessment\nYears (AY) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16, which in turn arose out of\nassessment orders passed by Assessing Officer (in short

CHANCHALBEN DAHYABHAI PATEL,DAMAN vs. ITO, DAMAN

ITA 1036/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Jun 2025AY 2013-14
Section 147Section 250

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act') by\nthe National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax\n(Appeals) [in short, “NFAC/CIT(E)”] all dated 13.08.2024, for the Assessment\nYears (AY) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16, which in turn arose out of\nassessment orders passed by Assessing Officer (in short

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, NA vs. ARIVS.GANDEVI TALUKA KHEDUT SAHAKARI SANGH LTD.,, NAVSARI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 130/SRT/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CA
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 251(1)(a)Section 80P(2)(A)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)

88,58,570.00 2) AGRICULTURAL ITEMS EXEMPT ACTIVITY – POWER 6,91,75,341.00 21.18 TRILLER SALE TOTAL SALES AS PER THE 32,18,49,700.00 ORDER OF THE LEARNED AO 3) DISALLOWANCE – Rs.88,58,570/- 18,76,245.00 @ 21.18% DISALLOWANCE AS PER ASSESSEE 4) DISALLOWANCE AS per AO 64,66,977.00 DIFFERENCE

GANDEVI TALUKA KHEDUT SAHAKARI SANGH LTD.,,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, NAVSARI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 137/SRT/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CA
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 251(1)(a)Section 80P(2)(A)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)

88,58,570.00 2) AGRICULTURAL ITEMS EXEMPT ACTIVITY – POWER 6,91,75,341.00 21.18 TRILLER SALE TOTAL SALES AS PER THE 32,18,49,700.00 ORDER OF THE LEARNED AO 3) DISALLOWANCE – Rs.88,58,570/- 18,76,245.00 @ 21.18% DISALLOWANCE AS PER ASSESSEE 4) DISALLOWANCE AS per AO 64,66,977.00 DIFFERENCE

GANDEVI TALUKA KHEDUT SAHAKARI SANGH LTD.,,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, NAVSARI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 138/SRT/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CA
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 251(1)(a)Section 80P(2)(A)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)

88,58,570.00 2) AGRICULTURAL ITEMS EXEMPT ACTIVITY – POWER 6,91,75,341.00 21.18 TRILLER SALE TOTAL SALES AS PER THE 32,18,49,700.00 ORDER OF THE LEARNED AO 3) DISALLOWANCE – Rs.88,58,570/- 18,76,245.00 @ 21.18% DISALLOWANCE AS PER ASSESSEE 4) DISALLOWANCE AS per AO 64,66,977.00 DIFFERENCE