Section 44ADA of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 44ADA is Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd Vs CIT 26 ITR 775 2. Kishinchand Chellaram v. CIT (60 ITD 560), cited in 14 of the 52 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 44ADA

Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd Vs CIT 26 ITR 775 2. Kishinchand Chellaram v. CIT
60 ITD 560 · 1997 · ITAT
14
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 44ADA

MANOJ RAJARAM SHARMA,THANE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8313/MUM/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarmanoj Rajaram Ito - 42(3)(4), Sharma, Mumbai Office No. 615, 6Th Vs. Kautilya Bhawan, C- Floor, Centura Square 41-43, Avenue 3, Near It Park, Sg Barve Videsh Bhavan, G Road, Thane, Block, Bkc, Mumbai Maharashtra-400 604. – 400 051. Pan/Gir No. Bytps1944K (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Suryadev Yadav, Shri Karan Hariya & Shri Prashant Gupta, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 20.03.2026

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 272A(1)(d)Section 4Section 44A

HARSHA BOJARAO DEVRAJ ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 41(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 8012/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejveer SinghFor Respondent: Ms. Deepika Arora
Section 115BSection 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

SUMBUL ALAM,RANCHI vs. ASSISTANT COOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANCHI

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 412/RAN/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2026AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

AUDREY BERNICE ROY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 494/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 194JSection 44A

INCOME TAX OFFICER-16(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RAFEEQ PEERMOHIDEEN, MUMBAI

ITA 7702/MUM/2025[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

TEJVIR SINGH MANESS,FARIDKOT PUNJAB vs. ITO WARD 1, FARIDKOT

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 276/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar05 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Udayan Dasguptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 276/Asr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Tejvir Singh Maness, Vs Ito, Bx 11/398, Ward 1, No.4, New Harindera Nagar, Faridkot Punjab 151203 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Baspm7258R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Virtual Hearing

For Appellant: None (Adjournment application) ]For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 250Section 44A

SUMBUL ALAM,RANCHI vs. THE ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANCHI

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 411/RAN/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Feb 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

PALAPETTY VELAPPAN SHAKTHIDARAN,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL), NASHIK

ITA 1939/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Vignaraj Bhat N, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate – Standing
Section 250Section 44ASection 56

MANDYAM KRISHNAKUMAR SATHYANARAYANA,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3)(5), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

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

ITA 1233/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri GS Prashanth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate – Standing
Section 250Section 44ASection 56Section 57

HEMANT KUMAR AGRAWAL,MUMBAI vs. ITO (42)(1)(2), KAUTILYA BHAVAN

ITA 4728/MUM/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 44A

SHEKHAR NARAYAN,PATNA vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 355/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 13Section 194Section 194JSection 250Section 44A

SHEKHAR NARAYAN,PATNA vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 354/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 13Section 194Section 194JSection 250Section 44A

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-9(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. KAJAL VILAS BANEKAR, PIMPRI

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 476/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.476/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2022-23 The Income Tax Officer, Vs Kajal Vilas Banekar, Ward-9(1), Pune. Flat No.17, Vijaya Apartment, New Kate Pimple Road, Pimpri, Pune – 411017. Pan: Cdmpb0020L Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Jitendra Tiwari Revenue By Smt Neha Thakkar – Virtual (On Rotation Duty) Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2022-23 Dated 05.12.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144B Of The Act, Dated 21.03.2024. Ita No.476/Pun/2025 [D]

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

MADDIRALA SRINIVASA RAO,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee, i

ITA 158/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2020-21
Section 115BSection 132Section 132ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 158

DHRUTI JAYSUKHBHAI RANPARIYA,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO WARD-2 (6) JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 536/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 536/Rjt/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dhruti Jaysukhbhai Ranpariya Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(6), बनाम/ Dhareshwar Appartment 56, Jamnagar, Aaykar Bhawan, 4Th Digvijay Plot, Floor, Manek Center, Nehru Road, Vs. Jamnagar (Guj) -361005 Jamnagar (Guj) -361006 "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No.: Aqkpr6633C : (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Hardik Vora, Ar राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16/12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/12/2025

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

DEEPALI KAPOOR,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-12(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 1097/HYD/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Nov 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1097/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2022-23) Ms. Deepali Kapoor Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 12 (1) Pan:Annpk2904M Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Pawan Kumar Chakrapani राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri R. Kumaran, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Ms. Deepali Kapoor (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 10.06.2025 For The A.Y 2022-23. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Impugned Order Of The Learned Authorities Below In So Far As It Is Against The Appellant Is Opposed To Law, Weight Of Page 1 Of 7

For Appellant: CA Pawan Kumar ChakrapaniFor Respondent: : Shri R. Kumaran, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 234BSection 68

INCOME TAX OFFICER, LOWER PAREL vs. BHAVANI BALASUBRAMANIAM IYER, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2933/MUM/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Yagnesh DesaiFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 69

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PIRMAL CHAMBER, LOWER PAREL vs. BHAVANI BALASUBRAMANIAM IYER, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2932/MUM/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Yagnesh DesaiFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 69

BHAVANI LYER,MUMBAI vs. ITO 24(1)(1)A, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2777/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Yagnesh DesaiFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 69

LEO BHAGINATH,MALAPARAMBA, KOZHIKODE vs. ITO,WARD-1(2), KOZHIKODE

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

ITA 626/COCH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Years: 2016-17 Leo Bhagianath .......... Appellant 34/290, Malaparamba, Kozhikode 673009 [Pan: Adtpl7403Q] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Kozhikode .......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Anand Kumar, V.K, Advocate Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.11.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 09.07.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is An Individual Deriving Income As An Advocate. The Return Of Income For Ay 2017- 18 Was Filed On 21.10.2017 Declaring Income Of Rs. 5,50,000/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Kozhikode (Hereinafter Called "The Ao") Vide Order Dated 04.12.2019 Passed U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) At A Total Income Of Rs. 42,72,800/-. While Doing So, The Ao Brought To Tax The Credits In The Bank

For Appellant: Shri Anand Kumar, V.K, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 44A

Showing 1–20 of 52 · Page 1 of 3

Section 44ADA of the Income Tax Act — Case Laws | BharatTax