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.

2 results for “disallowance”+ Section 2(24)(viia)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai274Bangalore122Chennai107Delhi93Kolkata40Pune24Hyderabad20Ahmedabad18Cochin18Surat17Jaipur16Cuttack14Chandigarh9Amritsar9Indore8Jodhpur7Rajkot6Panaji6Varanasi6Guwahati5Nagpur5Visakhapatnam4Karnataka3SC3Allahabad2Telangana2Lucknow1Dehradun1Raipur1

Key Topics

Section 36(1)(viia)6Section 14A2

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

In the result, the appeal (ITA/70/2011) is allowed to the extent indicated

ITTA/70/2011HC Telangana18 Apr 2011

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 20Th March, 2023 Appearance : Mr. C. Bhaskaran, Adv. Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. …For The Appellant. Mr. Aryak Dutt, Adv. …For The Respondent.. The Court : - This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated September 30, 2009 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Kolkata In Ita No.2486/Kol/2007 For The Assessment Year 2003-2004. The Appeal Was Admitted On 18.03.2011 On The Following Substantial Questions Of Law:- “1. Whether The Tribunal Below, While Interpreting Section 36(1)(Viia)(A) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, Committed Substantial Error Of Law In Holding That Deduction Under The First Proviso Was Alternative To That Under Sub-Clause (A) & That No Deduction Under The First Proviso Was Allowable If Deduction Had Been Allowed Under Sub-Clause (A) Thereby Rejecting The Appellant’S

Section 115JSection 14ASection 260ASection 36(1)(viia)

2) and (3) inserted in Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with effect from April 1,2007 and Rule 8D inserted in the Income Tax Rules 1962 on March 24, 2008 was procedural and retrospective and were applicable for the assessment year 2003-2004? 3. Whether the Tribunal below committed substantial error of law in directing the Assessing

The Commissioner of income Tax-II vs. M/s.Ideal Industrial Explosives Ltd

ITTA/100/2010HC Telangana01 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

For Appellant: M/S. CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD., THRISSURFor Respondent: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRICHUR

viia) while calculating the book profit under section 115JA in accordance with law?” In fact, the specific stand of the Assessing Officer (AO) and the Revenue in the statutory appeal was that ITAs3/2010 & conns. -16 in computing minimum alternate tax payable under Section 115JA, the provision for bad and doubtful debts has to be added back under clause