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.

10,227 results for “disallowance”+ Section 148clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,024Delhi1,956Chennai766Bangalore641Kolkata487Ahmedabad463Jaipur415Hyderabad372Pune318Chandigarh211Surat167Rajkot163Cochin162Indore143Raipur126Visakhapatnam121Nagpur107Amritsar81Lucknow77Panaji59Allahabad56Guwahati54Agra43Bombay41Jodhpur40Cuttack31Patna28Ranchi23Dehradun18SC16Jabalpur14Varanasi3H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Addition to Income77Section 143(3)73Section 14871Section 14748Section 26345Disallowance43Section 153C39Section 153A37Section 6831Section 271(1)(c)

SH. KAPIL TANEJA,JAIPUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 578/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69A

Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business expenditure - Allowability of (Bogus purchase) - Certain portion of purchases made by assessee was disallowed - Commissioner (Appeals) found that entire disallowance was based on third party information gathered by Investigation Wing of Department, which had not been independently subjected to further verification by Assessing Officer and he had not provided copy

Showing 1–20 of 10,227 · Page 1 of 512

...
22
Deduction18
Penalty15

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3 (2) (1) AND 2 OTHERS

WP/1945/2023HC Bombay15 Jan 2024

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE K.R. SHRIRAMHON'BLE JUSTICE DR. NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 246ASection 253Section 4A

disallow certain expenses. Therefore, the so-called income claimed to have escaped assessment is not represented in the form of asset. (v) In view of the Section 151A of the Act read with the E-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022, the issuance of notice under Section 148

BRIJESH CHANDWANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE -6(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1527/HYD/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2025AY 2016-2017
For Appellant: CA Pawan Kumar ChakrapaniFor Respondent: Sri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234A

section 148A and 148 of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. The Appellant denies himself liable to be assessed for an amount being Rs.48,14,31,240/-, as against the returned income of Rs.12,74,95,910/-, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 8. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in disallowing

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2),, CHENNAI

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

ITA 1236/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 148Section 20Section 250

Section 153A(1)(b) states that the assessing officer shall assess or Section 153A(1)(b) states that the assessing officer shall assess or Section 153A(1)(b) states that the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income of six years immediately preceding the reassess the total income of six years immediately preceding the reassess the total income

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

ITA 1256/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 148Section 20Section 250

Section 153A(1)(b) states that the assessing officer shall assess or Section 153A(1)(b) states that the assessing officer shall assess or Section 153A(1)(b) states that the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income of six years immediately preceding the reassess the total income of six years immediately preceding the reassess the total income

SONU AGARWAL ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1263/JPR/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Nov 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT
Section 10(38)Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

disallowed treating the same as assessee’s own unaccounted income in the guise of bogus LTCG. The AO accordingly assessed the total income Sonu Agarwal, Jaipur. of the assessee at Rs. 91,02,068/- under section 147 r.w.s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act, 1961 by making addition of Rs. 81,84,838/- under section 69A read with

HEXAWARE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 15(1)(2) MUMBAI AND 4 ORS

WP/1778/2023HC Bombay03 May 2024

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE K.R. SHRIRAMHON'BLE JUSTICE DR. NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80J

Section 149 of the Act has to be seen with respect to the original notice under Section 148 of the Act, which was issued to petitioner on 8th April 2021 and as the said notice was issued within the period of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year, which was expiring on 31st March 2022, the reassessment

BRIJESH CHANDWANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE -6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2020-2021 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1528/HYD/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1527 & 1528/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years – 2016-2017 & 2020-2021 Brijesh Chandwani The Dcit, Circle-6(1), Vs. Hyderabad – 500 034 Hyderabad. Pan Adkpc1537H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Pawan Kumar Chakrapani राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: CA Pawan Kumar ChakrapaniFor Respondent: Sri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234A

section 148A and 148 of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. The Appellant denies himself liable to be assessed for an amount being Rs.48,14,31,240/-, as against the returned income of Rs.12,74,95,910/-, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 8. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in disallowing

M/s JAY BHARAT MARUTI LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result the appeal is allowed and

ITA/501/2007HC Delhi20 Apr 2009
For Appellant: Mr R. Santhanam, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr R.D. Jolly, Advocate
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 260ASection 43B

Section 148 of the Act, the Assessing Officer‟s belief is not one which is a fact supported by legal evidence. It was contended that once a gateway is found by the Assessing Officer to reopen the proceedings he would be well within his jurisdiction to bring within his net any item of income which had escaped assessment or disallow

SAROJ DEVI HALDIYA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-6(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 917/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S.B. Natani, CAFor Respondent: Mrs.Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(2)(ix)Section 57

disallowed The assessee also accepted Rs.\n75,00,000 as an advance in relation of transfer of capital asset. The assessee\nfailed to give a satisfactory reply and provide any required details. Hence, the\nA.O. completed the assessment and passed order u/s 147/1448 of the Income-\ntax Act dated 13.12.2019 Assessing total Income

MOHIT CHANDAK,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), CHENNAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 191/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.191 & 194/Chny/2025 िनधा=रण वष= /Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

section 148A(b) and the details of material/ information on the basis of which the assessment is sought to be reopened was also provided to the appellant vide letter dated 01.06.2022. Later, order u/s 148A(d) was passed on 31.07.2022 and proceedings u/s 147 was initiated by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act dated

MOHIT CHANDAK,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), CHENNAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 194/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.191 & 194/Chny/2025 िनधा=रण वष= /Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

section 148A(b) and the details of material/ information on the basis of which the assessment is sought to be reopened was also provided to the appellant vide letter dated 01.06.2022. Later, order u/s 148A(d) was passed on 31.07.2022 and proceedings u/s 147 was initiated by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act dated

SUBODH CHANDRA DAS,HOOGHLY vs. I.T.O.,WARD-23(3), HOOGHLY

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

ITA 2246/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble) Ita No. 2246 & 2247/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

148 of the Act. Thereafter, he completed the assessment for the assessment year 2011-12 on 13/12/2018 Assessment Years: 2011 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Subodh Chandra Das determining the gross total income at Rs.11,20,501/ determining the gross total income at Rs.11,20,501/- interalia making addition of interalia making addition of Rs.7,24,475/-, as undisclosed

SUBODH CHANDRA DAS,HOOGHLY vs. I.T.O.,WARD-23(3), HOOGHLY

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

ITA 2247/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble) Ita No. 2246 & 2247/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

148 of the Act. Thereafter, he completed the assessment for the assessment year 2011-12 on 13/12/2018 Assessment Years: 2011 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Subodh Chandra Das determining the gross total income at Rs.11,20,501/ determining the gross total income at Rs.11,20,501/- interalia making addition of interalia making addition of Rs.7,24,475/-, as undisclosed

ACIT-15(3)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SURYA FERROUS ALLOYS PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeal are dismissed as having been rendered infructuous

ITA 1407/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. SinghFor Respondent: Shri Kishor Dhule
Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151ASection 40A(3)

disallowance of purchases to 4% an account of bogus purchases without considering the fact that during the course of search, the entry provider has himself admitted that assessee company has been provided accommodation entries for claiming bogus expenses to deflate the profit thereby the profit thereby evading income tax. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the cause

SH. HARI PRAKASH GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The appeal stands allowed

ITA 772/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 44A

disallowed the said amount u/s 37(1) as inadmissible expenditure. The action of the AO to invoke section 69A is not sustainable as the said expenditure has been incurred in the course of the business of the appellant. Accordingly ground no. 04 & 08 raised by the appellant are hereby partly allowed. 9. In the result, the appeal filed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MUKESH KUMAR SONI, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

ITA 656/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

For Appellant: Sh. S. B. Natani (FCA)For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar (CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148A

148 on 29.03.2022 by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer is in contravention of provisions of section 144B(5) and section 151A of the Income Tax Act 1961, and also subsequent Notification issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes No. S.O 1466 (E) dated 29.03.2022. For ready reference provisions of section 144B(5), section 151A and CBDT Notification dated

VENKATA PRASAD PULIPATI,AMARAVATHI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), GUNTUR

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

ITA 612/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.612/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Venkata Prasad Pulipati, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Amaravathi. Ward-2(1), Pan: Asapp8796L Guntur. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri I. Kama Sastry, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 03/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 19/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order

For Appellant: Shri I. Kama Sastry, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 30Section 69

148 of the Act, dated 27/07/2022. 3. Thereafter, the AO vide his order under section 30/05/2023 after making certain additions, viz., (i) short term capital gains (STCG) on sale of property: Rs.11,55,505/-; (ii) disallowance

LIC HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI, AAYKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5037/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Respondent: Mr. Sunil Bhandari &
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 80G

section 148. The reassessment culminated on 31.03.2024 with the disallowance of the said deduction under section 80G. disallowance of the said

SANGHI TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERBAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1311/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Us:

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 145Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 250Section 37(1)

disallowing the expenses 20 percent of total expenses claimed of Rs. 4,72,79,447/- on ad-hoc basis without pointing out any defects in the books of accounts maintained as same were allowable u/s 37(1) of the Act. 13. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the fact that return of income filed u/s 148