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.

39 results for “disallowance”+ Section 275clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi714Mumbai631Bangalore172Chennai168Kolkata132Ahmedabad124Jaipur94Cochin85Chandigarh57Surat46Hyderabad39Raipur33Pune29Karnataka20Indore19Nagpur19Cuttack18Amritsar17Lucknow15Rajkot13Ranchi11Jodhpur10Guwahati10Visakhapatnam7Telangana5Calcutta5Patna4Panaji4Allahabad3Varanasi3Agra3Jabalpur2SC2Dehradun1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 80I47Section 143(3)43Section 8028Deduction21Addition to Income21Disallowance17Section 153A16Section 26315Section 153C12Section 154

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

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Showing 1–20 of 39 · Page 1 of 2

10
Section 80P9
Penalty7

In the result. appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 708/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: [Through Hybrid Hearing]For Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 92C

275/- by making TP adjustment as suggested by the TPO under section 92CA(3) of the Act for Rs.1191,97,64,708/-, disallowance

MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result. appeal of the Assessee is partly\nallowed for statistical purposes and appeal of Revenue is\npartly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 663/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jun 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: \nCA Padamchand KhinchaFor Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 92C

275/- by\nmaking TP adjustment as suggested by the TPO under\nsection 92CA(3) of the Act for Rs.1191,97,64,708/-,\ndisallowance of depreciation claimed on goodwill arising out\nof amalgamation at Rs.1371,56,42,098/-, disallowance of\ndepreciation of non-compete fee of Rs.2,22,932/- and\ndisallowance of expenditure claimed on weighted deduction\nunder section

KAMAL ENTERPRISES AND NEW LIFE HOSPITAL,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 17/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, DR
Section 24Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

section 275 of the Act and, therefore, it is bad under law. It is also contended that there is no concealment of income and, therefore, mere disallowance

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

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

MATRIX SEA FOODS INDIA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT (OSD) WARD-16(4), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 102/HYD/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S Matrix Sea Foods Vs. Acit ( Osd ) India Limited, Hyderabad Ward 16(4) Pan:Aaecm4113H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 30/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Afzal, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)

section 40A(3) of the Act. Therefore, the disallowance to the extent of Rs.6,01,275/- is upheld. Accordingly, we direct

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1872/HYD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Kiran
Section 143(3)Section 80

275/-. The assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) in his order dated 04-02-2011 gave partial relief. The assessee as well as the department preferred appeal before ITAT, Hyderabad. The Hon'ble ITAT, Hyderabad in its order dated 28.12.2012 disposed off both the appeals. The income of the assessee was arrived

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1875/HYD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Kiran
Section 143(3)Section 80

275/-. The assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) in his order dated 04-02-2011 gave partial relief. The assessee as well as the department preferred appeal before ITAT, Hyderabad. The Hon'ble ITAT, Hyderabad in its order dated 28.12.2012 disposed off both the appeals. The income of the assessee was arrived

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1874/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Kiran
Section 143(3)Section 80

275/-. The assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) in his order dated 04-02-2011 gave partial relief. The assessee as well as the department preferred appeal before ITAT, Hyderabad. The Hon'ble ITAT, Hyderabad in its order dated 28.12.2012 disposed off both the appeals. The income of the assessee was arrived

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1873/HYD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Kiran
Section 143(3)Section 80

275/-. The assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) in his order dated 04-02-2011 gave partial relief. The assessee as well as the department preferred appeal before ITAT, Hyderabad. The Hon'ble ITAT, Hyderabad in its order dated 28.12.2012 disposed off both the appeals. The income of the assessee was arrived

CELESTIAL AVENUES PVT LTD REP. BY CSK PROPERTIES PVT LTD ON MERGER-PAN-AADCC3990R,HYDERABAD. vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD.

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

ITA 212/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad01 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha G, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.212 To 214/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/S. Sabir, Sew & The Deputy Commissioner Of Prasad, Jv, Vs. Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 6(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Abcfs2425A अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 801ASection 801A(4)Section 80I

disallowing the assessee's claim of deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the Act. 5. Feeling aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, assessee filed appeal before the LD.CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal of assessee by observing as under : “7.4 I have gone through the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT (supra) wherein the issue of the assessee's eligibility

SABIR, SEW 7 PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 214/HYD/2019[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2025AY 2008-2009
For Appellant: \nShri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: \nShri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 80I

disallowance on\n30.03.2010. On further appeal, the ITAT, vide order dated\n19.08.2013 in ITA No. 963/Hyd/2010, remitted the issue to the AO\nfor fresh examination in light of the decision in M/s Ramky\nInfrastructure Ltd. Accordingly, notice u/s 143(2) r.w.s.254 was\nissued on 03.10.2024 requiring the assessee to attend the office on\n14.11.2014 and furnished documents and other evidence

SABIR, SEW & PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 213/HYD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2025AY 2007-08
For Appellant: \nShri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: \nShri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 80I

disallowance on\n30.03.2010. On further appeal, the ITAT, vide order dated\n19.08.2013 in ITA No. 963/Hyd/2010, remitted the issue to the AO\nfor fresh examination in light of the decision in M/s Ramky\nInfrastructure Ltd. Accordingly, notice u/s 143(2) r.w.s.254 was\nissued on 03.10.2024 requiring the assessee to attend the office on\n14.11.2014 and furnished documents and other evidence

SABIR , SEW & PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 212/HYD/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2025AY 2006-07
For Appellant: \nShri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: \nShri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 801ASection 801A(4)Section 80I

disallowance on\n30.03.2010. On further appeal, the ITAT, vide order dated\n19.08.2013 in ITA No. 963/Hyd/2010, remitted the issue to the AO\nfor fresh examination in light of the decision in M/s Ramky\nInfrastructure Ltd. Accordingly, notice u/s 143(2) r.w.s.254 was\nissued on 03.10.2024 requiring the assessee to attend the office on\n14.11.2014 and furnished documents and other evidence

HARSHINI EPC PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 398/HYD/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri M. Naveen Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40(1)(ia)Section 43B

275. 9. Vibha Agrotech Limited Vs. DCIT – ITA No.179/Hyd/2018. 13. Per contra, ld. DR had submitted that the amendment under section 14A of the Act is introduced by the Finance Act, 2022 is retrospective in nature and therefore, the ld.CIT(A) had rightly dismissed the claim of the assessee. Further, he had relied upon the CBDT’s Circular No.5/2014 dt.11/02/2014

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. INDU PROJECTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Appeals are dismissed therefore

ITA 186/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Md.Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80Section 80ASection 80I

275] (SC); as considered in Jagati Publications Ltd. Vs. President (2015) [377 ITR 31] (Bombay) that a Special Bench’s constitution has to be in light of the foregoing regulation or by the hon’ble President, ITAT as per the relevant facts and circumstances of each and every case which nowhere exist as the assessee itself has not even preferred

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. INDU PROJECTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Appeals are dismissed therefore

ITA 187/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Md.Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80Section 80ASection 80I

275] (SC); as considered in Jagati Publications Ltd. Vs. President (2015) [377 ITR 31] (Bombay) that a Special Bench’s constitution has to be in light of the foregoing regulation or by the hon’ble President, ITAT as per the relevant facts and circumstances of each and every case which nowhere exist as the assessee itself has not even preferred

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. INDU PROJECTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Appeals are dismissed therefore

ITA 188/HYD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Md.Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80Section 80ASection 80I

275] (SC); as considered in Jagati Publications Ltd. Vs. President (2015) [377 ITR 31] (Bombay) that a Special Bench’s constitution has to be in light of the foregoing regulation or by the hon’ble President, ITAT as per the relevant facts and circumstances of each and every case which nowhere exist as the assessee itself has not even preferred