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.

100 results for “disallowance”+ Section 153Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,235Mumbai2,070Chennai617Bangalore584Hyderabad501Jaipur398Pune232Kolkata191Ahmedabad173Indore168Chandigarh167Amritsar130Cochin127Visakhapatnam100Nagpur96Rajkot92Raipur66Karnataka61Allahabad59Surat50Guwahati45Cuttack33Agra33Patna29Jodhpur26Lucknow25Dehradun21Ranchi21Kerala14Telangana6Calcutta5Varanasi4Gauhati2Punjab & Haryana2SC2Orissa1Rajasthan1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)110Section 153A108Section 13270Addition to Income63Section 143(2)54Search & Seizure46Section 14845Disallowance39Section 80I38Section 142(1)

LALITHA DEVI,,KAKINADA vs. THE ACIT,, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 111/VIZ/2017[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Apr 2018AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri P. Prabhakara MurthyFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal
Section 132Section 153CSection 54F

disallowed the interest relatable to the unsecured. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the A.O. as under: 8.4) I have carefully considered the written submissions and the facts of the case. There is no dispute regarding the action u/s.132

LALITHA DEVI,,KAKINADA vs. THE ACIT,, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

Showing 1–20 of 100 · Page 1 of 5

33
Section 153C32
Deduction31
ITA 112/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Apr 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri P. Prabhakara MurthyFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal
Section 132Section 153CSection 54F

disallowed the interest relatable to the unsecured. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the A.O. as under: 8.4) I have carefully considered the written submissions and the facts of the case. There is no dispute regarding the action u/s.132

KOTU SARAT KUMAR,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DY.CIT., VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 493/VIZ/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: ShriG.V.N. Hari–AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriD.K. Sonawal–Sr.DR
Section 132Section 153A

section 153A of the Act on 18/03/2014 calling for the return of income. In response to the notice issued, the assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 on 03/04/2014, admitting total income of Rs.1,82,87,670/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee filed the revised return of income on 21/01/2015 revising

KOTU ANASUYA (LATE),VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DCIT, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 494/VIZ/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: ShriG.V.N. Hari–AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriD.K. Sonawal–Sr.DR
Section 132Section 153A

section 153A of the Act on 18/03/2014 calling for the return of income. In response to the notice issued, the assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 on 03/04/2014, admitting total income of Rs.1,82,87,670/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee filed the revised return of income on 21/01/2015 revising

DY CIT, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. KOTU SARATH KUMAR`, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 496/VIZ/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: ShriG.V.N. Hari–AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriD.K. Sonawal–Sr.DR
Section 132Section 153A

section 153A of the Act on 18/03/2014 calling for the return of income. In response to the notice issued, the assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 on 03/04/2014, admitting total income of Rs.1,82,87,670/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee filed the revised return of income on 21/01/2015 revising

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ATR WAREHOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 103/VIZ/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

section 153A without taking note of the 4 decisions in the case of E.N. Gopakumar vs. CIT 390 ITR 131 (Kerala HC) and GMR energy Ltd (Karnataka HC) (ITA No. 358 of 2018). 4. Any other ground of appeal that may be raised at the time of hearing.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ANUMOLU TIRUPATI RAYUDU(HUF),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 100/VIZ/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

section 153A without taking note of the 4 decisions in the case of E.N. Gopakumar vs. CIT 390 ITR 131 (Kerala HC) and GMR energy Ltd (Karnataka HC) (ITA No. 358 of 2018). 4. Any other ground of appeal that may be raised at the time of hearing.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ATR WAREHOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 102/VIZ/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

section 153A without taking note of the 4 decisions in the case of E.N. Gopakumar vs. CIT 390 ITR 131 (Kerala HC) and GMR energy Ltd (Karnataka HC) (ITA No. 358 of 2018). 4. Any other ground of appeal that may be raised at the time of hearing.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee

BTHINA KUMARA SWAMY REDDY,NELLORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 289/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.287, 288 & 289/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Bathina Kumara Swamy Reddy V. Dcit – Central Circle -1 C.R. Building, Kannavari Thota Plot No. 7, Santhi Nagar Guntur – 522001, Andhra Pradesh Nellore - 524003 [Pan: Abxpb1094K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 40

Section 153A is vitiated and has become unsustainable in law since the approval U/s 153D has been accorded by Addl. CIT / JCIT(Range Head) in a mechanical manner. 3. On the facts and circumstance of the case, Learned CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.3,98,669/- towards Disallowance

BATHINA KUMARA SWAMY REDDY,NELLORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 288/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.287, 288 & 289/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Bathina Kumara Swamy Reddy V. Dcit – Central Circle -1 C.R. Building, Kannavari Thota Plot No. 7, Santhi Nagar Guntur – 522001, Andhra Pradesh Nellore - 524003 [Pan: Abxpb1094K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 40

Section 153A is vitiated and has become unsustainable in law since the approval U/s 153D has been accorded by Addl. CIT / JCIT(Range Head) in a mechanical manner. 3. On the facts and circumstance of the case, Learned CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.3,98,669/- towards Disallowance

BATHINA KUMARA SWAMY REDDY,NELLORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 287/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.287, 288 & 289/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Bathina Kumara Swamy Reddy V. Dcit – Central Circle -1 C.R. Building, Kannavari Thota Plot No. 7, Santhi Nagar Guntur – 522001, Andhra Pradesh Nellore - 524003 [Pan: Abxpb1094K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 40

Section 153A is vitiated and has become unsustainable in law since the approval U/s 153D has been accorded by Addl. CIT / JCIT(Range Head) in a mechanical manner. 3. On the facts and circumstance of the case, Learned CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.3,98,669/- towards Disallowance

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. ATREYAPURAM SWARNA LAKSHMI,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 557/VIZ/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Mar 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.Nos.557&558/Vizag/2017 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2007-08) Dcit, Central Circle Smt. Atreyapurapu Vijayawada Swarnalakshmi Visakhapatnam [Pan No.Adbpa3951Tg] (अपीऱार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यार्थी / Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R.S. Aravindakshan, Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri I. Kamasastry, Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 19.03.2018 घोषणध की तधरीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Duvvur R.L. Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri R.S. AravindakshanFor Respondent: Shri I. Kamasastry, AR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

disallowed as per the statutory provisions and also in the light of various judicial precedents existing on the issue. On consideration of the written submissions contended in her reply, the ld. CIT, Hyderabad, had passed an order under section 263 of the Act dated 25/03/2014 setting aside the order passed under section 143(3) read with sec. 153A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. ATREYAPURAM SWARNA LAKSHMI,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 558/VIZ/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.Nos.557&558/Vizag/2017 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2007-08) Dcit, Central Circle Smt. Atreyapurapu Vijayawada Swarnalakshmi Visakhapatnam [Pan No.Adbpa3951Tg] (अपीऱार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यार्थी / Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R.S. Aravindakshan, Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri I. Kamasastry, Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 19.03.2018 घोषणध की तधरीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Duvvur R.L. Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri R.S. AravindakshanFor Respondent: Shri I. Kamasastry, AR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

disallowed as per the statutory provisions and also in the light of various judicial precedents existing on the issue. On consideration of the written submissions contended in her reply, the ld. CIT, Hyderabad, had passed an order under section 263 of the Act dated 25/03/2014 setting aside the order passed under section 143(3) read with sec. 153A

NO 368 KOLAKALURU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TENALI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee society is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 456/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.456/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2019-20) No.368 Kolakaluru Primary Vs. Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Cooperative Ward-1, Credit Society Limited, Tenali. Tenali. Pan: Aaban6994Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 04/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Society Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 08/07/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. 4. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing." 2. Succinctly stated, the AO based on information disseminated in accordance with the Risk Management Strategy (RMS), which revealed that the assessee society had during the subject year made cash deposits/withdrawals aggregating

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VIJAYAWADA vs. NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 184/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 133Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148A

Section 40A(3) of the Act out of the expenditure incurred under patient refund account without bringing any corroborative evidences of such nature of payment. 4. The Learned CIT (Appeals) is not justified in directing the AO to estimate disallowance @ 25% out of the expenditure claimed under referral payments of Rs.34,84,567/- without any basis and any justifiable evidence

NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 147/VIZ/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 133Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148A

Section 40A(3) of the Act out of the expenditure incurred under patient refund account without bringing any corroborative evidences of such nature of payment. 4. The Learned CIT (Appeals) is not justified in directing the AO to estimate disallowance @ 25% out of the expenditure claimed under referral payments of Rs.34,84,567/- without any basis and any justifiable evidence

NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 148/VIZ/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 133Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148A

Section 40A(3) of the Act out of the expenditure incurred under patient refund account without bringing any corroborative evidences of such nature of payment. 4. The Learned CIT (Appeals) is not justified in directing the AO to estimate disallowance @ 25% out of the expenditure claimed under referral payments of Rs.34,84,567/- without any basis and any justifiable evidence

NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 146/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 133Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148A

Section 40A(3) of the Act out of the expenditure incurred under patient refund account without bringing any corroborative evidences of such nature of payment. 4. The Learned CIT (Appeals) is not justified in directing the AO to estimate disallowance @ 25% out of the expenditure claimed under referral payments of Rs.34,84,567/- without any basis and any justifiable evidence

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VIJAYAWADA vs. NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 186/VIZ/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 133Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148A

Section 40A(3) of the Act out of the expenditure incurred under patient refund account without bringing any corroborative evidences of such nature of payment. 4. The Learned CIT (Appeals) is not justified in directing the AO to estimate disallowance @ 25% out of the expenditure claimed under referral payments of Rs.34,84,567/- without any basis and any justifiable evidence

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VIJAYAWADA vs. NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 187/VIZ/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 133Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148A

Section 40A(3) of the Act out of the expenditure incurred under patient refund account without bringing any corroborative evidences of such nature of payment. 4. The Learned CIT (Appeals) is not justified in directing the AO to estimate disallowance @ 25% out of the expenditure claimed under referral payments of Rs.34,84,567/- without any basis and any justifiable evidence