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.

28 results for “disallowance”+ Section 138clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai783Delhi736Bangalore310Chennai211Kolkata208Ahmedabad183Jaipur144Cochin83Hyderabad79Chandigarh65Raipur54Pune53Indore49Calcutta40Rajkot40Lucknow38Nagpur33Visakhapatnam33Surat28Amritsar26Karnataka16Cuttack13Allahabad13Jodhpur9Panaji7SC5Telangana5Agra3Guwahati3Dehradun3Patna3Orissa2Andhra Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1Jabalpur1Rajasthan1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 26345Section 143(3)35Disallowance22Addition to Income21Section 14819Section 254(1)16Section 153C10Deduction9Section 1548Section 147

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), SURAT vs. J K PAPER LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 181/SRT/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) D.C.I.T. M/S J.K. Paper Ltd. Circle-1(1)(2), P.O. Central Pulp Mill, Vs. Surat. Fort Songadh, Surat. Pan : Aaact 6305 N Appellant Respondednt

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 145ASection 254(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 292BSection 40aSection 80I

138 & 189/Ahd/2017 dated 07/09/2018 had deleted the addition. Before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. AR made out a case that there can be no such disallowance for the reason that expenses were of personal nature as has been held by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron &Engg

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2

7
Survey u/s 133A7
Section 142(1)6

SATYAM TEXTILE PARK,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 91/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Oct 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 263Section 271DSection 40

138 and section 189 of the Income Tax Act. On the basis of the above submissions the ld AR for the assessee submits that the assessment order for both the years cannot be branded as erroneous, thus, cannot be subject to revision under section 263. for A.Y. 2016-17 & 2017-18 Satyam Textile Park 7. On the second issue identified

SATYAM TEXTILE PARK,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 90/SRT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 263Section 271DSection 40

138 and section 189 of the Income Tax Act. On the basis of the above submissions the ld AR for the assessee submits that the assessment order for both the years cannot be branded as erroneous, thus, cannot be subject to revision under section 263. for A.Y. 2016-17 & 2017-18 Satyam Textile Park 7. On the second issue identified

AMRUT SAROVAR,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISIONER INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), SURAT

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in all three assessment years are allowed

ITA 92/SRT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 263

disallowances / additions under section 37,40A(3), 40(a)(ia) 68 and other provisions of the Act. The AO has not examined the payment of interest in cash and sources of cash payment made for purchase of land in village Kathore is also not examined either in the hand of firm or partners. Further arrangement regarding use of partners land

AMRUT SAROVAR,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISIONER INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), SURAT

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in all three assessment years are allowed

ITA 94/SRT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 263

disallowances / additions under section 37,40A(3), 40(a)(ia) 68 and other provisions of the Act. The AO has not examined the payment of interest in cash and sources of cash payment made for purchase of land in village Kathore is also not examined either in the hand of firm or partners. Further arrangement regarding use of partners land

AMRUT SAROVAR,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISIONER INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), SURAT

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in all three assessment years are allowed

ITA 93/SRT/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 263

disallowances / additions under section 37,40A(3), 40(a)(ia) 68 and other provisions of the Act. The AO has not examined the payment of interest in cash and sources of cash payment made for purchase of land in village Kathore is also not examined either in the hand of firm or partners. Further arrangement regarding use of partners land

THE ACIT, VALSAD CIRCLE,, VALSAD vs. M/S. SAVITA CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,, VALSAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3495/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S Savita Construction Income Tax, Valsad Circle Pvt. Ltd., Vs Room No.208, 2Nd Floor, New Gidc, Income Tax Office, “Palak Gundiav, Valsad Arcade” Shnatinagar, Pan : Aafcs 3408 Q Tithal Road, Valsad-396001 Revenue / Appellant Assessee /Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147oSection 148Section 254(1)Section 43B

disallowed u/s 43B of the Act. The assessee further explained that sec. 43B states that certain payment should be allowed 4 M/s Savita Construction Pvt. Ltd. to be claimed an expense only in the year in which they have been paid and not in the year in which the liability to such sum was incurred. The provision

M/S. MITSU PRIVATE LIMITED,,VAPI vs. THE ACIT, VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1000/AHD/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Sandip Gosain & Shri O. P. Meenav. ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं././././I "नधा"र अपीलाथ" Appellant S .T.A No. ण N वष"/A Y: 1 1671/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 2 1371/Ah 2002- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 03 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Co.No.1 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant 3 84/Ahd/ 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of 2006 Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 4 1672/Ah 2003- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 04 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 5 1764/Ah 2003- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 04 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q 6 1000/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2016 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 7 3510/Ah 2000- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2016 01 Commissioner Of Page 2 Of 83 Mitsu Ltd. V. Acit- Vapi/I.T.A. No.1671-1371,Co-184,1672-1764,1614 &1000/Ahd/2006/A.Y.02-03,03-04,06-07.02-03 Income Tax-Vapi 304/2, Iind Phase, Circle, Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q

Section 143

disallowed. 113. In appeal, CIT (A) observed that expenditure has been incurred for new product registration without which the assessee cannot sell its product in market. The benefit of this registration would be available to the assessee at least three years for which the AO has accepted the alternate plea. Hence, this ground was dismissed. Page 52 of 83 Mitsu

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI vs. M/S. MITSU LIMITED,, DAMAN

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3510/AHD/2016[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Sandip Gosain & Shri O. P. Meenav. ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं././././I "नधा"र अपीलाथ" Appellant S .T.A No. ण N वष"/A Y: 1 1671/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 2 1371/Ah 2002- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 03 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Co.No.1 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant 3 84/Ahd/ 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of 2006 Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 4 1672/Ah 2003- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 04 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 5 1764/Ah 2003- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 04 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q 6 1000/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2016 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 7 3510/Ah 2000- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2016 01 Commissioner Of Page 2 Of 83 Mitsu Ltd. V. Acit- Vapi/I.T.A. No.1671-1371,Co-184,1672-1764,1614 &1000/Ahd/2006/A.Y.02-03,03-04,06-07.02-03 Income Tax-Vapi 304/2, Iind Phase, Circle, Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q

Section 143

disallowed. 113. In appeal, CIT (A) observed that expenditure has been incurred for new product registration without which the assessee cannot sell its product in market. The benefit of this registration would be available to the assessee at least three years for which the AO has accepted the alternate plea. Hence, this ground was dismissed. Page 52 of 83 Mitsu

BHARUCH DISTRICT CO OP MILK PRODUCERS UNION LIMITED,BHARUCH vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the grounds of appeals raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 209/SRT/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) The Bharuch District Co Op Milk A.C.I.T. Producers Union Limited, Circle-1, Vs. Old N.H. 8, Bholav, Bharuch. Bharuch-392001. Pan No. Aaaat 1470 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(va)

138/- was made on account of depreciation on subsidy and addition of Rs. 14,65,972/- on account of delay in deposit of employees’ contribution of PF and ESI and initiated penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars. 3. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), all the additions in quantum assessment was upheld and no further appeal was filed by assessee

D V PROPERTIES PVT. LTD,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1(1)(1), SURAT, SURAT

ITA 519/SRT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.519/Srt/2023 (Ay 2015-16) (Hearing In Physical Court) D.V. Properties Pvt, Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of 748-749 Golden Plaza Market, Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1) Vs Ring Road, Surat-395002 Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Nr. Pan No. Aaacd 8392 B Majura Gate, Opp. New Civil Hospital, Surat-395001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

138 (SC); CIT Vs. Ayachi Chandrashekhar Narsangji (2014) 42 taxmann.com 251 (Guj). For proposed interest disallowance, the assessee submitted that loan is genuine, therefore interest expenses incurred by it also genuine. On proposed addition of commission @ 2% of loan amount, the assessee stated that there is no evidence that assessee has given any commission for obtaining such unsecured loan

SANTOSH SINGH HUKAM SINGH KARNAWAT,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(8), SURAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 655/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

disallowances before we decide the issue before us. 9. Their Lordships of Punjab & Haryana High Court in Hari Gopal Vs. CIT [258 ITR 85 (P&H) held as under : "In order to attract clause (c) of section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, it is necessary that there must be concealment by the assessee of the particulars

RADHESHYAM UPADHYAY,SURAT vs. ITO WARD, 1 (2) (6), SURAT

In the result, all the grounds appeal raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 144/SRT/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 154Section 254(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of four (4) appeals by the assessee(s) are directed against the separate orders of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Surat/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 27/07/2021 and 03/08/2021 for the Assessment years (AY) 2018-19 and 2019-20 respectively

RADHESHYAM UPADHYAY,SURAT vs. ITO WARD, 1 (2) (6), SURAT

In the result, all the grounds appeal raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 143/SRT/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 154Section 254(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of four (4) appeals by the assessee(s) are directed against the separate orders of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Surat/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 27/07/2021 and 03/08/2021 for the Assessment years (AY) 2018-19 and 2019-20 respectively

BHUVANESHSINGH L. DALAWAT,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD. 1(2)(1), SURAT

In the result, all the grounds appeal raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 138/SRT/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 154Section 254(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of four (4) appeals by the assessee(s) are directed against the separate orders of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Surat/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 27/07/2021 and 03/08/2021 for the Assessment years (AY) 2018-19 and 2019-20 respectively

BHUVANESHSING L. DALAWAT,SURAT vs. ITO WARD.1(2) (1) , SURAT

In the result, all the grounds appeal raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 142/SRT/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 154Section 254(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of four (4) appeals by the assessee(s) are directed against the separate orders of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Surat/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 27/07/2021 and 03/08/2021 for the Assessment years (AY) 2018-19 and 2019-20 respectively

M/S. SAMRIDDHI CORPORATION,,SURAT vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-1(2),, SURAT

In the result, cross appeals of Revenue as well as Assessee are dismissed

ITA 3035/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Meenaassessment Year: 2009-10 Samruddhi Corporation, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Megh Dhwani Complex, Income Tax, Circle-1(2), City Light Road, Surat – 395007. Surat. [Pan: Aaofm 5334 M] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Samruddhi Corporation, Tax, Circle-1(2), Surat. Megh Dhwani Complex, City Light Road, Surat – 395007. [Pan: Aaofm 5334 M] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

disallowance of certain expenses u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The provisions of section 147 have undergone a drastic change since 01.04.89. The leading case on this issue is that of Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society, 119 ITR 996 wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the opinion of the Internal Audit Party on a point of law could

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2),, SURAT vs. M/S. SAMRUDDHI CORPORATION,, SURAT

In the result, cross appeals of Revenue as well as Assessee are dismissed

ITA 3390/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Meenaassessment Year: 2009-10 Samruddhi Corporation, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Megh Dhwani Complex, Income Tax, Circle-1(2), City Light Road, Surat – 395007. Surat. [Pan: Aaofm 5334 M] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Samruddhi Corporation, Tax, Circle-1(2), Surat. Megh Dhwani Complex, City Light Road, Surat – 395007. [Pan: Aaofm 5334 M] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

disallowance of certain expenses u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The provisions of section 147 have undergone a drastic change since 01.04.89. The leading case on this issue is that of Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society, 119 ITR 996 wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the opinion of the Internal Audit Party on a point of law could

MAGANLAL HARICHAND SONI,BARDOLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD ONE BARODOLI

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

ITA 606/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Maganlal Harichand Soni, I.T.O., Main Bazar, Zankhwav, Ward-1, Vs. Surat-394440. Bardoli. Pan No. Bkcps 6931 D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 254(1)Section 44ASection 68

disallowance out of total cash deposit which is otherwise a part of business proceed. 3. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue supported the orders of lower authorities. The ld. Sr. DR for the revenue submits that the assessee has not filed any cogent evidence to substantiate the fact about cash deposit

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, SURAT vs. M/S. TRANSIT GEO SYSTEMS INTEGRATORS PVT. LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3330/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.3330/Ahd/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) D.C.I.T., Circle-2(1)(1), M/S Transit Geo Systems Integrator Pvt. Ltd., 13-C-404, 1St Floor, Room No.223, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Parshvanath Complex, Above Bhakti Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Automobiles, Udhna, Magdalla Road, Surat-395017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadct 4158 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra– CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(3)

disallowance of the labour contract expenses of Rs.4,03,34,386/- makes the GP the assessee @ 33% which is itself absurd in the line of assessee`s business. Therefore, based on these facts, the ld CIT(A) deleted the addition. 6. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before us. 7. Before us, Shri