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.

2,034 results for “disallowance”+ Survey u/s 133Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai480Delhi308Jaipur159Chennai137Bangalore132Hyderabad122Kolkata102Rajkot84Pune65Ahmedabad56Chandigarh47Indore46Visakhapatnam41Surat35Guwahati33Amritsar28Nagpur26Raipur24Ranchi19Agra17Jodhpur16Lucknow15Panaji10Cochin9Cuttack6Allahabad5Patna5Varanasi5Jabalpur1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)97Addition to Income70Section 14869Survey u/s 133A69Section 133A66Section 14756Section 13237Section 153C37Section 6833Section 151

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. G NINE MODULAR PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3212/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was tax Act, 1961 was carried out in the premises of the company M/s carried out in the premises of the company M/s carried out in the premises of the company M/s TanayaVincom TanayaVincom TanayaVincom Pt Pt Pt Ltd Ltd Ltd on on on 13.11.2019. 13.11.2019. 13.11.2019. The The The survey survey survey

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. G NINE MODULAR PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 2,034 · Page 1 of 102

...
30
Disallowance27
Reopening of Assessment19
ITA 3213/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: Disposed
ITAT Mumbai
28 Apr 2023
AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was tax Act, 1961 was carried out in the premises of the company M/s carried out in the premises of the company M/s carried out in the premises of the company M/s TanayaVincom TanayaVincom TanayaVincom Pt Pt Pt Ltd Ltd Ltd on on on 13.11.2019. 13.11.2019. 13.11.2019. The The The survey survey survey

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. G NINE MODULAR PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3214/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was tax Act, 1961 was carried out in the premises of the company M/s carried out in the premises of the company M/s carried out in the premises of the company M/s TanayaVincom TanayaVincom TanayaVincom Pt Pt Pt Ltd Ltd Ltd on on on 13.11.2019. 13.11.2019. 13.11.2019. The The The survey survey survey

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 01,, VARANASI vs. M/S RATANDEEP GOLD & DIAMOND PVT. LTD., CHANDAULI

ITA 136/VNS/2020[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi03 Feb 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner M/S Ratandeep Gold & Diamond Of Income Tax, V. Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1, M A Road, 19, New Mohal, Varanasi-211001, U.P. Near Balika Inter College, Mugalsarai, Chandauli- 232101, U.P. Pan:Aahcr4764Q (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 02/Vns/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 136/Vns/2020) Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S Ratandeep Gold & The Deputy Commissioner Of Diamond Pvt. Ltd. V. Income Tax,Circle-1, M.A. Road 19, New Mohal, Varanasi-211001, U.P. Near Balika Inter College, Mugalsarai, Chandauli- 232101, U.P.

For Appellant: Shri Shishir Bajpai, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 69A

disallowed by the AO is placed. It was submitted by ld. Counsel for the assessee that tax audit of the accounts was duly conducted and these expenses are duly reflected in the books of accounts of the assessee. It was submitted that return of income was filed on 07.11.2017, while survey u/s 133A

PINK CITY JEWEL HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

ITA 598/JPR/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019
For Appellant: Sh. Siddharth Ranka, AdvFor Respondent: \nSh. Saurav Harsh, Adv.&
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144oSection 14ASection 263Section 69

disallowed, subsequently relief was granted to the\nassessee appellant by the Hon'ble ITAT.\n1.12. That survey proceeding u/s 133A

DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. ANANDILAL & GANESH PODAR SOCIETY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1791/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 147

133A conducted on them and the disallowance / addition is not based on any tangible material found during the course of search u/s 132 of the Act on Podar Group. The Ld.AR also argued that the statements recorded u/s 131 during the course of survey

DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. ANANDILAL & GANESH PODAR SOCIETY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1790/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 147

133A conducted on them and the disallowance / addition is not based on any tangible material found during the course of search u/s 132 of the Act on Podar Group. The Ld.AR also argued that the statements recorded u/s 131 during the course of survey

DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. ANANDILAL & GANESH PODAR SOCIETY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1792/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 147

133A conducted on them and the disallowance / addition is not based on any tangible material found during the course of search u/s 132 of the Act on Podar Group. The Ld.AR also argued that the statements recorded u/s 131 during the course of survey

POONA OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGICAL SOCIETY,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL, PUNE, PUNE

ITA 518/PUN/2023[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2025
Section 12A

disallowed the benefit of the exemption for\ncommission provided to doctors engaged in private practice for referring\ntheir patients to the assessee's diagnostic centre, holding that:\n"It, thus, emerges that an assessee would not be entitled to\ndeduction of payments made in contravention of law. Similarly,\npayments which are opposed to public policy being in the nature

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING (P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT (OSD), ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 154/ALLD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 40

survey u/s 133A on 27.08.2009, which assessee is required to explain. Principles of natural justice also demand that all the relied upon seized/impounded material as well relied upon statements recorded be also provided to assessee for rebuttal (if not yet provided but relied upon during set aside proceedings to cause prejudice to assessee), before any prejudice is caused

KESARWANI MARKETING(P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 373/ALLD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 40

survey u/s 133A on 27.08.2009, which assessee is required to explain. Principles of natural justice also demand that all the relied upon seized/impounded material as well relied upon statements recorded be also provided to assessee for rebuttal (if not yet provided but relied upon during set aside proceedings to cause prejudice to assessee), before any prejudice is caused

RUKHMANI TRADERS,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 18 MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 822/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Rukhmani Traders, Asst. Cit -18(3), 6Th Floor, A Wing, Aurus Chambers, Earnest House, Nariman Point, Vs. S.S. Amrutwar Marg, Behind Mumbai-400021. Mahindra Towers, Worli, Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aalfr 1619 R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Shreyash ShahFor Respondent: Mrs. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 151

survey u/s 133A of the Act carried out by the Investigation Wing of Income of Income-tax Department, Ahmadabad tax Department, Ahmadabad at the premises of the brokers and few of their clients on 23.03.2015. The premises of the brokers and few of their clients on 23.03.2015. The premises of the brokers and few of their clients

M/S GANESH BUILDERS,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the respective appeals and stay applications are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 452/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR &
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 251Section 251(1)Section 271

survey u/s 133A was carried out. We find that the same is purely legal in nature and no new facts are required to be gone into to decide this ground of appeal. Therefore, in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of NTPC (Supra), the additional ground raised by the appellant is hereby

M/S LUXMI BUILDERS,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the respective appeals and stay applications are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 451/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR &
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 251Section 251(1)Section 271

survey u/s 133A was carried out. We find that the same is purely legal in nature and no new facts are required to be gone into to decide this ground of appeal. Therefore, in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of NTPC (Supra), the additional ground raised by the appellant is hereby

D G LAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

ITA 402/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Respondent: Mr. Sanjeev Mehta a/w Saurabh
Section 132Section 4

disallowing of Rs.1,08,40,272/- being difference in stamp being difference in stamp duty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year, duty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year, duty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year, under section 43CA of the Act. under section 43CA

D G LAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

ITA 403/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Respondent: Mr. Sanjeev Mehta a/w Saurabh
Section 132Section 4

disallowing of Rs.1,08,40,272/- being difference in stamp being difference in stamp duty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year, duty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year, duty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year, under section 43CA of the Act. under section 43CA

D G LAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

ITA 404/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Respondent: Mr. Sanjeev Mehta a/w Saurabh
Section 132Section 4

disallowing of Rs.1,08,40,272/- being difference in stamp being difference in stamp duty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year, duty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year, duty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year, under section 43CA of the Act. under section 43CA

ISHOO NARANG,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 450/HYD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.450/Hyd/2022 & S.A. No.1/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ishoo Narang Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 2(1) Pan:Aaupn9082B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Th Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15/07/2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Al The Mandatory Preconditions Before Reopening Of Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act Were Duly Complied & Met With By The A.O.

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT (DR)
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 147Section 68

survey conducted u/s 133A of the I.T. Act, 1961 rejected the grounds taken by the assessee challenging the reopening of the assessment u/s 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 on the ground that there is enough material which come to the possession of the Assessing Officer subsequent to completion of the assessment which suggests escapement of income on account

MAHADHAN AGRITECH LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SMARTCHEM TECHNOLOGIES LTD ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEAL)--50, MUMAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed, and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2229/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69A

disallowance under the normal provisions of the Act on account of difference in stock in AY 2019-20, the following contentions were put forth: 111. The ld. AR highlighted that during the Survey proceedings conducted u/s 133A

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(1), MUMBAI vs. MAHADHAN AGRITECH LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed, and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3569/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69A

disallowance under the normal provisions of the Act on account of difference in stock in AY 2019-20, the following contentions were put forth: 111. The ld. AR highlighted that during the Survey proceedings conducted u/s 133A