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.

5 results for “disallowance”+ Section 88clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,824Delhi3,100Chennai1,042Bangalore1,013Kolkata925Ahmedabad800Hyderabad503Pune488Jaipur472Indore341Chandigarh303Surat252Visakhapatnam206Cochin187Cuttack164Nagpur150Raipur143Amritsar141Rajkot107Agra103Lucknow96Guwahati83Allahabad58Calcutta49Karnataka47Panaji47Patna45Ranchi44Telangana37Jodhpur29SC17Dehradun14Jabalpur10Varanasi5Rajasthan3Kerala3Punjab & Haryana3Himachal Pradesh2Gauhati1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1Uttarakhand1Orissa1

Key Topics

Addition to Income5Section 50C4Section 69A3Section 1443Section 142(1)3Section 124(3)(a)2Section 124(2)2Section 250(1)2Comparables/TP2

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 01, VARANASI vs. PERFECT TECNO COUNSULTANTS PVT. LTD. , VARANASI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 139/VNS/2020[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi13 Apr 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year: 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Perfect Techno Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Circle-1, Aayakarbhawan, V. N-1/65-A, Narrotam Nagar Colony, M A Road, Varanasi- Nagwa, Lanka Varanasi-221005,U.P. 221002,U.P. Pan:Aagcp3236N (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By: Sh. Amalendunath Mishra, Cit Dr Assessee By: Sh. Mohammad Ashraf, C.A. Date Of Hearing: 11.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.04.2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Sh. Mohammad Ashraf, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. AmalenduNath Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 68Section 69A

88,227/- u/s. 115JB(2) of the 1961 Act. The assessee’s case was selected by Revenue for framing complete scrutiny assessment through Computer Aided Scrutiny Selection(CASS) with the reasons mainly “cash deposit during demonetization period”. Statutory notices were issued by AO u/s. 143(2) , dated 21.09.2018 and 09.10.2018 to the assessee , which were claimed by AO to have

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2 (1),, VARANASI vs. PROMINENT DATAMATICS MARKETING PVT. LTD., , VARANASI

ITA 135/VNS/2020[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi05 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 124(1)(a)Section 124(2)Section 124(3)(a)Section 250(1)Section 255(4)Section 69A

88,328/- minus Rs.21,97,16,115/-) shall not be disallowed and added to its total income and brought to tax accordingly. As the assessee company did not respond at all hence I have decided to add Rs.8,22,70,213/- to the total income of the assessee companyPenalty proceedings has been initiated u/s 272A(1)(d) for non-compliancewith

AWADHESH KUMAR,BALLIA vs. ITO, WARD - 2(4), BALLIA

ITA 179/VNS/2019[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi14 Oct 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2016-17 Awadhesh Kumar, V. Income Tax Officer, Arya Samaj Road, Ballia, Ward-2(4), Ballia, U.P. Uttar Pradesh Pan-Athpk1294N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.A. Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.10.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 50C

disallowed by the Assessing Officer and his action confirmed by the CIT(A) is highly unjustified. 6. That in any view of the matter finding an observation of both the two lower authorities with regard to addition of Rs. 8,32,507/- and Rs. 84,000/- are incorrect and contrary to the actual facts of the case. 7. That

SHRI OM PRAKASH JAISWAL, PROP. M/S. JAISWAL TRADING COMPANY, ,GORAKHPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GORAKHPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 63/ALLD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi09 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

88,02,119/-. There should not be any dispute that the value of closing stock shown as on 31.3.2012 shall constitute opening stock as on 1.4.2012. Thus the assessee has shown excess stock of Rs. 1,09,948/- in the opening stock, the effect of which is that the profit of the year relevant to AY 2013-14 shall

OM PRAKASH JAISWAL,,GORAKHPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3),, GORAKHPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 216/ALLD/2018[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi09 Nov 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

88,02,119/-. There should not be any dispute that the value of closing stock shown as on 31.3.2012 shall constitute opening stock as on 1.4.2012. Thus the assessee has shown excess stock of Rs. 1,09,948/- in the opening stock, the effect of which is that the profit of the year relevant to AY 2013-14 shall