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.

47 results for “disallowance”+ Section 36(1)(vii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,189Delhi2,041Bangalore728Chennai576Kolkata390Ahmedabad302Jaipur221Pune169Chandigarh164Hyderabad157Indore121Cochin117Nagpur108Rajkot81Surat75Raipur74Karnataka69Amritsar56Lucknow50Visakhapatnam47Cuttack44Calcutta43Guwahati37Panaji36Ranchi33SC25Allahabad23Patna20Jodhpur20Telangana18Kerala14Dehradun13Agra7Varanasi7Punjab & Haryana4Himachal Pradesh3Rajasthan2Orissa2Jabalpur2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 80P62Section 143(3)60Section 14838Section 43B30Deduction29Disallowance23Section 220Section 142(1)19Section 148A18Section 80P(2)(a)

THEGANAHALLY RAMAKRISHNA RAMESHA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 230/VIZ/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sri Suseel Kumar AgarwalFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 2Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36 of the Act by inserting another explanation to the said clause to clarify that the provision of section 43B does not apply and deemed to never have been applied for the purposes of determining the ―due date‖ under this clause; and (ii) amend section 43B of the Act by inserting Explanation 5 to the said section to clarify that

Showing 1–20 of 47 · Page 1 of 3

18
Addition to Income16
Survey u/s 133A8

VENKATA RAO PATNALA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(4), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 181/VIZ/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sri Suseel Kumar AgarwalFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 2Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36 of the Act by inserting another explanation to the said clause to clarify that the provision of section 43B does not apply and deemed to never have been applied for the purposes of determining the ―due date‖ under this clause; and (ii) amend section 43B of the Act by inserting Explanation 5 to the said section to clarify that

SRI RAM TRAVELS,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(2), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 228/VIZ/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sri Suseel Kumar AgarwalFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 2Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36 of the Act by inserting another explanation to the said clause to clarify that the provision of section 43B does not apply and deemed to never have been applied for the purposes of determining the ―due date‖ under this clause; and (ii) amend section 43B of the Act by inserting Explanation 5 to the said section to clarify that

SRI KRISHNA SHIPPING CORPORATION,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 201/VIZ/2021[2018-19]Status: PendingITAT Visakhapatnam17 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sri Suseel Kumar AgarwalFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 2Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36 of the Act by inserting another explanation to the said clause to clarify that the provision of section 43B does not apply and deemed to never have been applied for the purposes of determining the ―due date‖ under this clause; and (ii) amend section 43B of the Act by inserting Explanation 5 to the said section to clarify that

SHREE BALAJI UDYOG,SRIKAKULAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, SRIKAKULAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 249/VIZ/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sri Suseel Kumar AgarwalFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 2Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36 of the Act by inserting another explanation to the said clause to clarify that the provision of section 43B does not apply and deemed to never have been applied for the purposes of determining the ―due date‖ under this clause; and (ii) amend section 43B of the Act by inserting Explanation 5 to the said section to clarify that

SRI KRISHNA SHIPPING CORPORATION,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 202/VIZ/2021[2019-20 (APRIL 2018)]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Mar 2022

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sri Suseel Kumar AgarwalFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 2Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36 of the Act by inserting another explanation to the said clause to clarify that the provision of section 43B does not apply and deemed to never have been applied for the purposes of determining the ―due date‖ under this clause; and (ii) amend section 43B of the Act by inserting Explanation 5 to the said section to clarify that

HARSH VARDHAN SERVICES,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1) , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 248/VIZ/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sri Suseel Kumar AgarwalFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 2Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36 of the Act by inserting another explanation to the said clause to clarify that the provision of section 43B does not apply and deemed to never have been applied for the purposes of determining the ―due date‖ under this clause; and (ii) amend section 43B of the Act by inserting Explanation 5 to the said section to clarify that

VENKATA RAO PATNALA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(4), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 180/VIZ/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sri Suseel Kumar AgarwalFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 2Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36 of the Act by inserting another explanation to the said clause to clarify that the provision of section 43B does not apply and deemed to never have been applied for the purposes of determining the ―due date‖ under this clause; and (ii) amend section 43B of the Act by inserting Explanation 5 to the said section to clarify that

HARSH VARDHAN SERVICES,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1) , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 247/VIZ/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sri Suseel Kumar AgarwalFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 2Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36 of the Act by inserting another explanation to the said clause to clarify that the provision of section 43B does not apply and deemed to never have been applied for the purposes of determining the ―due date‖ under this clause; and (ii) amend section 43B of the Act by inserting Explanation 5 to the said section to clarify that

SAI PRIYA ESTATES & RESORTS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(2), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 231/VIZ/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sri Suseel Kumar AgarwalFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 2Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

36 of the Act by inserting another explanation to the said clause to clarify that the provision of section 43B does not apply and deemed to never have been applied for the purposes of determining the ―due date‖ under this clause; and (ii) amend section 43B of the Act by inserting Explanation 5 to the said section to clarify that

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

36(1)(iii) and without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Durga Prasad More(1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) (546,547), wherein it was held that "Sciencehas not yet invented any instrument to test the reliability evidence placed before a Court or a Tribunal. Therefore, the courts and and the Tribunals have

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

36(1)(iii) and without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Durga Prasad More(1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) (546,547), wherein it was held that "Sciencehas not yet invented any instrument to test the reliability evidence placed before a Court or a Tribunal. Therefore, the courts and and the Tribunals have

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

36(1)(iii) and without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Durga Prasad More(1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) (546,547), wherein it was held that "Sciencehas not yet invented any instrument to test the reliability evidence placed before a Court or a Tribunal. Therefore, the courts and and the Tribunals have

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

36(1)(iii) and without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Durga Prasad More(1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) (546,547), wherein it was held that "Sciencehas not yet invented any instrument to test the reliability evidence placed before a Court or a Tribunal. Therefore, the courts and and the Tribunals have

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 145/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

36(1)(iii) and without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Durga Prasad More(1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) (546,547), wherein it was held that "Sciencehas not yet invented any instrument to test the reliability evidence placed before a Court or a Tribunal. Therefore, the courts and and the Tribunals have

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

36(1)(iii) and without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Durga Prasad More(1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) (546,547), wherein it was held that "Sciencehas not yet invented any instrument to test the reliability evidence placed before a Court or a Tribunal. Therefore, the courts and and the Tribunals have

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 185/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

36(1)(iii) and without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Durga Prasad More(1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) (546,547), wherein it was held that "Sciencehas not yet invented any instrument to test the reliability evidence placed before a Court or a Tribunal. Therefore, the courts and and the Tribunals have

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

36(1)(iii) and without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Durga Prasad More(1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) (546,547), wherein it was held that "Sciencehas not yet invented any instrument to test the reliability evidence placed before a Court or a Tribunal. Therefore, the courts and and the Tribunals have

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2402/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

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

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

disallowance of provision for doubtful debts of Rs. 10,54,813/- the Ld. AR submitted that since even though the amount was not written off in the books of accounts, certain provision has been made which was considered doubtful of recovery in the books of accounts. The Ld. AR also pleaded that this provision for doubtful debts has been directly

VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. CIT(A) 14, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2479/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

disallowance of provision for doubtful debts of Rs. 10,54,813/- the Ld. AR submitted that since even though the amount was not written off in the books of accounts, certain provision has been made which was considered doubtful of recovery in the books of accounts. The Ld. AR also pleaded that this provision for doubtful debts has been directly