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.

25 results for “disallowance”+ Section 246clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai658Delhi466Bangalore192Chennai142Kolkata141Jaipur84Lucknow37Raipur37Chandigarh32Ahmedabad32Hyderabad25Indore24Pune24Nagpur20Surat16SC14Karnataka14Cuttack9Jodhpur8Cochin8Rajkot8Varanasi5Visakhapatnam4Allahabad4Patna4Telangana4Amritsar3Panaji2Jabalpur2Calcutta2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)34Section 14716Addition to Income16Disallowance14Section 14811Section 26311Section 143(1)10Section 689Exemption9Deduction

F5 NETWORKS INNOVATION PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 912/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Narender Kumar Naik
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 92C

246 of the Act. The assessee is required to choose the right course of action diligently which depends upon different facts and circumstances. 25.5 Nevertheless, the object for making the adjustment in the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act or framing the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act is to determine the income and tax liability

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

Showing 1–20 of 25 · Page 1 of 2

8
Penalty7
Section 106
ITA 1300/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

disallowed on a technical reason of delay in\nfiling of the Audit Report in Form No. 10B, which is due to\na reasonable cause and the same is beyond the control of\nthe appellant.\n4.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) has erred in observing that the appellant\nhas not given any reasonable cause for delay in filing the\nappeal by over

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 973/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

disallowed on a technical reason of delay in\nfiling of the Audit Report in Form No. 10B, which is due to\na reasonable cause and the same is beyond the control of\nthe appellant.\n4.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) has erred in observing that the appellant\nhas not given any reasonable cause for delay in filing the\nappeal by over

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 1301/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

disallowed on a technical reason of delay in\nfiling of the Audit Report in Form No. 10B, which is due to\na reasonable cause and the same is beyond the control of\nthe appellant.\n4.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) has erred in observing that the appellant\nhas not given any reasonable cause for delay in filing the\nappeal by over

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, three appeals i

ITA 972/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

disallowed on a technical reason of delay in\nfiling of the Audit Report in Form No. 10B, which is due to\na reasonable cause and the same is beyond the control of\nthe appellant.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) has erred in observing that the appellant\nhas not given any reasonable cause for delay in filing the\nappeal by over

PRYSMIAN CAVI E SISTEMI S.R.L,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT (INT,TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1242/HYD/2024[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Jul 2025AY 2001-02
For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 263

246/-. While\ncomputing the total income, the Ld. AO adopted the income assessed in the\nearlier order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act dated 20.12.2006 and\nadded the above estimated profits over and above the same. The assessee\nfiled a third appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against this reassessment order under\nsection 143(3) r.w.s

PRYSMIAN CAVI E SISTEMI SRL INDIA PROJECT OFFICE (FORMERLY PIRELLI CAVI SISTEMI S P A INDIA PROJECT OFFICE),HYDERABAD vs. DCIT,( INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 723/HYD/2022[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Jul 2025AY 2001-2002
For Appellant: \nShri Nitesh Joshi, C.AFor Respondent: \nShri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 263

246/-. While\ncomputing the total income, the Ld. AO adopted the income assessed in the\nearlier order under section 143(3) r.w.s.263 of the Act dated 20.12.2006 and\nadded the above estimated profits over and above the same. The assessee\nfiled a third appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against this reassessment order under\nsection 143(3) r.w.s.147

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, WARANGAL vs. SHIVA KUMAR THOTA, WARANGAL

In the result, the primary objection filed by the assessee vide his letter, dated 02/06/2025 is allowed while for the appeal filed by

ITA 996/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.996/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shiva Kumar Thota, Ward-1, Warangal. Warangal. Pan: Aaopt4519M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 06/08/2024 Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 26/05/2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Revenue Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 43BSection 68

disallowance under section 43B of the Act: Rs.6,08,594/-; (vi) addition of undisclosed interest income: Rs.2,46,769/- ; and (vii) addition of undisclosed sales: Rs.3,34,246

SREE NAGENDRA CONSTRUCTIONS,,KHAMMAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 198/HYD/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Feb 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CA
Section 44ASection 68

246 ITR 283), the amount of\nRs.1,70,23,768/- is brought to tax as unexplained credits\nu/s 68 of the Act. Addition: Rs.1,70,23,768/-.”\n\n8.\nThus, it is clear that it is a case of increase in the\nsundry creditors during the year consideration to the tune of\nRs.1,70,23,768/-. The Assessing Officer proceeded

RAMKY INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. JCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 593/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Ramky Infrastructure Ltd, Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income Tax, Pan:Aaacr8627B Circle 3(1), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram. Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 15/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/11/2022 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 80I

disallowed claim to an extent of Rs.4,74,2747. 7. It is submitted that the assessment passed on 11.11.2011 under section 143(3) of the Act by the AO got merged with the subsequent reassessment order passed subsequently on 31.03.2015 under section 143(3) rws 153A of the Act. It is further submitted that the order passed under section

VEERA REDDY POSHAM,NALGONDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.No.1830/Hyd

ITA 1830/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.Nos.1829 & 1830/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2020-2021 & 2022-2023 Veera Reddy Posham, The Acit, Nalgonda – 508 246 Central Circle-1(1), Vs. Telangana. Hyderabad. Telangana. Pan Aijpp0376P (Applicant) (Respondent) -None- िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By : राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13.03.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

For Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234FSection 250(6)Section 270ASection 80CSection 80C(2)(xvii)

246 Central Circle-1(1), vs. Telangana. Hyderabad. Telangana. PAN AIJPP0376P (Applicant) (Respondent) -None- िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee by : राज" व "ारा/Revenue by : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 09.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13.03.2026 आदेश/ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT : These two appeals by the Assessee are directed against the separate

ANDHRA PRAGATHI FARMERS SERVICE CO- OP SOCEITY,PAMULAPADU vs. ITO WARD-2, NANDYAL

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 247/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri K.A. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Sri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 236Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

disallowing the assessees' section 80P(2)(d) deduction claims in issue qua the respective interest income derived form fixed deposit in nationalised banks. The PCITs' revision direction under challenge herein forming subject matter of these two appeals stand reversed on the very analogy therefore. We lastly quote hon'ble apex court's ITA Nos.284 & 286/Hyd/2021 landmark decision Malabar Industrial

ANDHRA PRAGATHI FARMERS SERVICE CO- OP SOCEITY,YERRAGUNTLA vs. ITO WARD-2, NANDYAL

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 246/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri K.A. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Sri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 236Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

disallowing the assessees' section 80P(2)(d) deduction claims in issue qua the respective interest income derived form fixed deposit in nationalised banks. The PCITs' revision direction under challenge herein forming subject matter of these two appeals stand reversed on the very analogy therefore. We lastly quote hon'ble apex court's ITA Nos.284 & 286/Hyd/2021 landmark decision Malabar Industrial

ANDHRA PRAGATHI FARMERS SERVICE CO- OP SOCEITY,PEDDA HARIVANAM vs. ITO WARD-1, ADONI

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 248/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri K.A. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Sri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 236Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

disallowing the assessees' section 80P(2)(d) deduction claims in issue qua the respective interest income derived form fixed deposit in nationalised banks. The PCITs' revision direction under challenge herein forming subject matter of these two appeals stand reversed on the very analogy therefore. We lastly quote hon'ble apex court's ITA Nos.284 & 286/Hyd/2021 landmark decision Malabar Industrial

VEERA REDDY POSHAM,NALGONDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.No.1830/Hyd

ITA 1829/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2026AY 2020-21
For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 270ASection 80CSection 80C(2)(xvii)

246\nTelangana.\nPAN AIJPP0376P\n(Applicant)\nThe ACIT,\nCentral Circle-1(1),\nHyderabad.\nTelangana.\n(Respondent)\nvs.\nनिर्धारिती द्वारा/Assessee by : -None-\nराजस्व द्वारा /Revenue by : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR\nसुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 09.03.2026\nघोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 13.03.2026\nआदेश/ORDER\nPER VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT :\nThese two appeals by the Assessee are directed\nagainst

SHUBHAM TRADING COMPANY,NIZAMABAD vs. ITO., WARD 1, NIZAMABAD

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

ITA 840/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri G. Saratha, SR-DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 43B

246 – Rs.10,28,016) claimed towards VAT & CST payment is disallowed and added to the total income. (Addition: 8,27,230)” 7.1 On perusal of above, we find that, the Ld. AO disallowed Rs.8,27,230/- based on the difference between the claim made by the assessee and the confirmation received by the Ld. AO from the bank. Further

VIJAYAWADA TOLLWAY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is\nOrder pronounced in the Open Court on 6th February, 2026

ITA 1468/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Feb 2026AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

disallowance of expenditure, the Ld. AO initiated\npenalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and levied\npenalty of Rs.3,74,31,109/- vide order dated 27.03.2022.\n4.\nAggrieved with the penalty order of the Ld. AO, the\nassessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who confirmed\nthe penalty levied by the Ld. AO and dismissed

ASWIN ENTERPRISES,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1267/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Mar 2026AY 2018-19
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 40

disallowed the total expenses of Rs.51,46,442/-, viz., (i) salary and wages: Rs.24,46,699/-; (ii) travelling expenses: Rs.3,51,246/-; (iii) remuneration of partners: Rs.16,00,000/-; and (iv) other expenses: Rs.7,48,497/-. Accordingly, the AO, vide his order passed under section

DCIT, CIRCLE-17(1),HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. FARMAX INDIA LTD., HYD, R.R.DIST

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed and the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

ITA 655/HYD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2009-10 Farmax India Limited Vs. Dcit,Circle-1(3) 4Th Floor, Alluri Trade Centre I.T.Towers, A.C.Guards Bhagayanagar Colony Masab Tank Opp.Kphb Colony Hyderabad Kukatpally Hyderabad-500 072

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 148Section 40A(3)

section 35D(2) of the I.T.Act. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld.CIT(A) on this issue and accordingly, the same is upheld. The grounds raised by the assessee is accordingly dismissed. 14. Grounds of appeal No. 4 and 5 relate to the order of the ld.CIT(A) in sustaining the addition of Rs.3

FARMAX INDIA LIMITED,,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed and the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

ITA 937/HYD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2009-10 Farmax India Limited Vs. Dcit,Circle-1(3) 4Th Floor, Alluri Trade Centre I.T.Towers, A.C.Guards Bhagayanagar Colony Masab Tank Opp.Kphb Colony Hyderabad Kukatpally Hyderabad-500 072

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 148Section 40A(3)

section 35D(2) of the I.T.Act. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld.CIT(A) on this issue and accordingly, the same is upheld. The grounds raised by the assessee is accordingly dismissed. 14. Grounds of appeal No. 4 and 5 relate to the order of the ld.CIT(A) in sustaining the addition of Rs.3