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.

209 results for “disallowance”+ Section 36(1)(va)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,243Mumbai809Kolkata544Bangalore440Chennai404Ahmedabad366Jaipur354Pune302Hyderabad209Chandigarh191Raipur136Indore132Visakhapatnam104Amritsar99Surat92Nagpur86Jodhpur76Cuttack72Agra66Lucknow62Cochin60Guwahati47Rajkot32Jabalpur20Ranchi16Karnataka15Varanasi12Patna10Allahabad8Panaji8Dehradun7SC5Telangana4Rajasthan3Calcutta2Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 36(1)(va)129Section 43B86Addition to Income82Disallowance72Section 143(1)63Deduction51Section 10A48Section 139(1)39Section 143(3)35Section 36

ICOMM TELE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA No.130/Hyd/2023 for the A

ITA 130/HYD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

1) (va) of the Act but not by section 43B of the Act. In view of the above the belated payment/ not paid payment of employee contribution to PF and ESI account of Rs.1,68,27,755/- is disallowed u/s. 36

Showing 1–20 of 209 · Page 1 of 11

...
30
Section 80I30
Search & Seizure12

ICOMM TELE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA No.130/Hyd/2023 for the A

ITA 60/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

1) (va) of the Act but not by section 43B of the Act. In view of the above the belated payment/ not paid payment of employee contribution to PF and ESI account of Rs.1,68,27,755/- is disallowed u/s. 36

COUNTRY CLUB HOSPITALITY & HOLIDAYS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1480/HYD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2011-12
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

disallowed belated payment of employees’ contribution towards PF and ESI for Rs. 15,61,389/- on the ground that, belated payment of employees’ contribution towards PF and ESI partakes the nature of the income as referred to under Section 36(1)(va

SUDHAKAR RAO DONDAPATI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-13(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 129/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं/Ita No. 129/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Sudhakar Rao Dondapati, Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad Vs. Ward-13(3), [Pan No. Aeupr8022H] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri T. Balaji, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Waseem Ur Rehman, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख /Date Of Hearing: 21/03/2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख /Pronouncement On: 21/03/2023

For Appellant: Shri T. Balaji, ARFor Respondent: Shri Waseem UR Rehman, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act in the order passed under section 143(1) of the Act and, therefore

GRIP STRAPPING TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-2(2) , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 249/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act in the order dated 13/11/2019 passed under section 143(1) of the Act and, therefore

SAHRUDAYA HEALTH CARE (KURNOOL) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 596/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Sahrudaya Health Care Vs. The Income Tax Officer, (Kurnool), Private Limited, Ward 3 (1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aawcs3735M. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Kumar Adithya. Date Of Hearing: 20.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Adithya
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act in the order dated 20.01.2021 passed under section 143(1) of the Act and, therefore

SRI RAMA AGRI GENETICS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,KURNOOL vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL

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

ITA 1179/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)Section 41(1)Section 68

Section 36(1)(va) for Rs. 3,66,095/-, addition towards disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 36(1)(iii) for Rs. 11,08,678/-, disallowance

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

section 36(1)(va) of the Act. However, the said deposits were made prior to filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. 6.1 Of course, it is a case in point that the assessee did not file any appeal against the intimations passed us 143(1) of the Act and the Ld. Sr. DR is right

SUDHEER PARIMALA,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 758/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.758/Hyd./2025 Assessment Year 2015-2016 Sudheer Parimala, The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad – 500 016. Vs. Ward-10(1), Hyderabad. Pan Ahppp7572E Pin - 500 004. Telangana (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Ca Kranthi Palivela & Ca Mrudulatha For Revenue : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing : 24.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.04.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA Kranthi Palivela And CA MrudulathaFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 69A

36(1)(va) is Rs.2.20,089/- 3. As verified from 3CD report, assessee was shown the an amount of Rs. 78,26,412/- additions to the block of assets. During the assessment proceedings, assessee has not given details and supporting evidences about additions to the block of assets. Hence, the AO has not verified the genuineness of the additions

TIBERWALA ELECTRONICS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 425/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 246ASection 249(3)Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act in the order dated 14.05.2019 passed under section 143(1) of the Act and, therefore

TIBERWALA ELECTRONICS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 424/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 246ASection 249(3)Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act in the order dated 14.05.2019 passed under section 143(1) of the Act and, therefore

VE VEE'S MANAGERIAL SERVICES,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA No. 167/Hyd/2022 & 168/Hyd/2022 are allowed and ITA No

ITA 167/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Y.V.Bhanu Narayan RaoFor Respondent: Shri M.Narmada,CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowances u/s. 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) can be made on account of delayed payment of PF and ESIC, if such payments are made before the due date of filing of the return. It has further been held in these decisions that the amendment to section

SRI LAKSHMI ROAD TRANSPORT COMPANY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1209/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1209/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S Sri Lakshmi Road Vs. Dy. Cit Transport Company Circle 6(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aatfs6596A (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri C. Maheshwar Reddy, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 24/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 26/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri C. Maheshwar Reddy, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)

disallowed under section 36(1)(va) of the Act”. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee

ADROIT MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SECUNDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1044/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14 Adroit Management Consultants Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward – Pvt. Ltd., Secunderabad 1(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aahca2632C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A. SrinivasFor Respondent: Shri K. Srinivas Reddy
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 4

section 36(1)(va) to disallow ESI & PF payments. We have carefully gone through the section 36(1)(va) with

ANALOGICS TECH INDIA LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 247/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 37Section 37(1)

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is dismissed. 12. Ground No.2 Before

MEGHA DESHPANDE,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-10(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 91/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda

For Appellant: Ms. Snehal Thakkar, FACFor Respondent: Sri R.S.Aravindakshan,DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowances u/s. 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) can be made on account of delayed payment of PF and ESIC, if such payments are made before the due date of filing of the return. It has further been held in these decisions that the amendment to section

MEGHA DESHPANDE ,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-10(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 90/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda

For Appellant: Ms. Snehal Thakkar, FACFor Respondent: Sri R.S.Aravindakshan,DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowances u/s. 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) can be made on account of delayed payment of PF and ESIC, if such payments are made before the due date of filing of the return. It has further been held in these decisions that the amendment to section

ANAND ISPAT UDYOG LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1580/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Sarang ShahFor Respondent: Smt. M. Narmada, DR
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 43B

section 36(1)(va) and disallowed Rs. 1,52,190/-. It was also observed during the scrutiny proceedings that assessee

MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2335/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Respondent: Sh. YVST Sai, D.R
Section 251Section 28Section 32Section 32(1)Section 37(1)Section 43(1)Section 68

disallowed u/s 37. Further to the above and the discussion had with our good selves in relation to claim of pay back to EU Commission of GBP 11.8 million income earned earlier under a settlement agreement between Matrix Laboratories (now Known as 'Mylan Laboratories Limited'), we submit as under,. 1. The taxpayer has developed and stabilized the process for manufacture

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD vs. MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 12/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Respondent: Sh. YVST Sai, D.R
Section 251Section 28Section 32Section 32(1)Section 37(1)Section 43(1)Section 68

disallowed u/s 37. Further to the above and the discussion had with our good selves in relation to claim of pay back to EU Commission of GBP 11.8 million income earned earlier under a settlement agreement between Matrix Laboratories (now Known as 'Mylan Laboratories Limited'), we submit as under,. 1. The taxpayer has developed and stabilized the process for manufacture