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.

4 results for “disallowance”+ Permanent Establishmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,108Mumbai935Chennai512Bangalore292Kolkata232Ahmedabad135Jaipur89Cochin63Chandigarh56Raipur47Karnataka39Amritsar37Indore35Hyderabad29Rajkot26Pune22Cuttack22Visakhapatnam21Guwahati19Lucknow16Surat14SC13Varanasi11Dehradun8Panaji7Agra6Nagpur4Telangana4Kerala3Patna2Calcutta1Jabalpur1Jodhpur1Rajasthan1Allahabad1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 2602

Commissioner of IncomeTax-2, vs. Mr. Mustafa Alam Khan,

Appeal is allowed

ITTA/72/2017HC Telangana29 Jun 2017

Bench: SANJAY KUMAR,GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD

Section 260Section 80J

permanent employees solely on the ground that they were employed for less than 300 days during the relevant previous years despite the fact that they had been employed for periods much longer than 300 days?” Re. substantial questions of law Nos.(i) and (ii): 7. The relevant facts necessary for consideration of the said substantial questions of law are that

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M.Venkata Krishna Mohan

ITTA/325/2005HC Telangana07 Apr 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

established with aid and assistance of foreign country will continue. Since, it is found that the Agreement in question was crucial for setting up of the plant project in question for manufacturing of the goods, the expenditure in the form of royalty paid would be in the nature of capital expenditure and not revenue expenditure. The Tribunal is conclusion that

The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. M/s Vaishnavi Educational Society

In the result, this Cross Objection is allowed and the suit is

ITTA/554/2015HC Telangana01 Jun 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

permanent prohibitory injunction against the Owners from trespassing into the properties covered by RFA 554/15 & CON. CASES 11 the Sale Deeds, asserting that the said Deeds are valid and themselves to be in its possession. 5. The afore three suits were taken to trial jointly, and the Trial Court marked Exhibits A1 to A30 on the side of the Owners

M/S.HASTALLOY INDIA LTD vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/VIZAG

ITTA/22/2000HC Telangana16 Aug 2012

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

permanent staff for maintenance, repairs and providing stipulated facilities by separately charging some nominal fees would not render the monthly rentals from bare letting out of the flats as involving complex activities of the nature of organized business. The case of Narasingh Kar, 113 ITR 712 (OR) referred to by the A.R. was clearly distinguishable on facts since the activities