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”+ Section 198clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi759Mumbai729Kolkata251Bangalore249Ahmedabad163Chennai155Jaipur138Hyderabad99Pune78Chandigarh61Lucknow48Raipur47Surat40Calcutta34Cochin33Visakhapatnam28Indore26Rajkot24Cuttack20Karnataka16Guwahati15Nagpur10SC10Allahabad7Amritsar6Jodhpur6Jabalpur5Rajasthan4Ranchi4Varanasi4Telangana4Dehradun3Patna3Himachal Pradesh2Panaji1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 1475Section 260A4Section 1484Section 143(3)3Section 373Section 2602Section 1a2Disallowance2Addition to Income2

PROGREESIVE CONSTRUCTIONS LIMITED vs. JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITTA/163/2005HC Telangana21 Sept 2022

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

For Appellant: SRI CHALLA GUNARANJAN
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 1aSection 260Section 260ASection 4l

Section 1a8(sz;) o[ the Act, assessing officer computed t zol trn ltz 5 the total incor,re of the assessee at Rs.2,16,89,170.00. Flowever, after adjustmerrt of the refund for earlier assessment y3ars, the amount payabl,: bythe assessee was quantified at Rs.95,690.00. 7. Against rhe aforesaid order of assessment, assessee preferred appeal before r he Commissioner

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. J Charan Kumar [HUF]

The appeals are dismissed

ITTA/211/2017HC Telangana17 Apr 2017

Bench: J. UMA DEVI,V RAMASUBRAMANIAN

Section 260ASection 37

disallowed in terms contemplated by Explanation 1 forming part of Section 37. 21. Appearing for the respondent assessee, Mr. Vohra, learned senior counsel submitted that it would be wholly incorrect to view the Bar Council of India Rules as amounting to a prohibition imposed by law and thus fall within the ken of Explanation 1. Mr. Vohra submitted that

The Director of Income Tax, (Exemptions) vs. Royal Education Society

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

ITTA/392/2016HC Telangana20 Oct 2016

Bench: ANIS,SANJAY KUMAR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260Section 260A

198 ITR 297 (SC) and holding that concluded issue in the original proceeding cannot be re-agitated in re- assessment proceedings even though the 3 case of the appellant is distinguishable in as much as there was no original assessment proceedings on the facts and circumstances of the case? (2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in not appreciating

The Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s. Coromandel Wines,

Accordingly the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed, and the

ITTA/481/2010HC Telangana30 Nov 2010

Bench: Or After Obtaining The Licence.

Section 260A

198, 201, 203, 226, 227, 229, 230, 288, 437, 454, 468, 474, 481, 483, 485, 492 and 504 of 2010 COMMON JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao) In all these cases the assessees were granted a licence under the Andhra Pradesh Indian Liquor and Foreign Liquor Rules, 1970 and the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968. The licence enabled