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.

772 results for “disallowance”+ Section 41clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,717Delhi4,884Bangalore1,814Chennai1,582Kolkata1,264Ahmedabad1,201Hyderabad772Pune761Jaipur673Indore501Chandigarh418Surat368Cochin251Raipur249Visakhapatnam227Nagpur201Cuttack187Amritsar185Rajkot178Lucknow169Karnataka127Agra110Guwahati90Allahabad83Ranchi64Panaji50Calcutta49SC46Telangana43Jodhpur40Dehradun33Patna31Varanasi22Jabalpur21Kerala15Punjab & Haryana7Rajasthan5Orissa2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2ANIL R. DAVE AMITAVA ROY L. NAGESWARA RAO1Himachal Pradesh1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Bombay1Tripura1

Key Topics

Addition to Income92Section 153B72Section 143(3)55Section 153A53Disallowance47Section 6841Section 143(2)37Deduction36Section 13227Section 80

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 281/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

41,133/- booked by the assessee attracts the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, and accordingly, completed the assessment u/s. 153A by making addition of Rs. 13,02,340/- on account of disallowance

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 282/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

41,133/- booked by the assessee attracts the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, and accordingly, completed the assessment u/s. 153A by making addition of Rs. 13,02,340/- on account of disallowance

Showing 1–20 of 772 · Page 1 of 39

...
27
Section 292C24
Penalty24

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 280/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

41,133/- booked by the assessee attracts the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, and accordingly, completed the assessment u/s. 153A by making addition of Rs. 13,02,340/- on account of disallowance

CHINTALAPATI HOLDINGS PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

ITA 385/HYD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri H. Srinivasulu, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 24

disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules. He considered the decisions relied upon by the assessee viz-a-viz the CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2014 to reach a conclusion that when once there is an exempt income from the investments and there is a claim of interest expenses

CHINTALAPATI HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ITA 1730/HYD/2016[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2023

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

For Appellant: Shri H. Srinivasulu, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 24

disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules. He considered the decisions relied upon by the assessee viz-a-viz the CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2014 to reach a conclusion that when once there is an exempt income from the investments and there is a claim of interest expenses

CHINTALAPATI HOLDINGS PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

ITA 386/HYD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri H. Srinivasulu, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 24

disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules. He considered the decisions relied upon by the assessee viz-a-viz the CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2014 to reach a conclusion that when once there is an exempt income from the investments and there is a claim of interest expenses

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

disallowance of expenses claimed by the assessee under the head ‘trade discounts' and 'seed purchases' to the tune of Rs. 18,31,21,070/- and addition towards advances under Section 68 of the Act for Rs. 1,99,60,299/- and addition towards cessation of liabilities under Section 41

KASUSALYA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 683/HYD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

disallowance of finance charges amounting to Rs.95,48,200/-, which was confirmed by the ld.CIT(A). 40. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. ITA No.685/Hyd/2020 – A.Y. 2018-19 41. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a private limited company engaged in the business of construction and sale of residential

KASUSALYA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 684/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

disallowance of finance charges amounting to Rs.95,48,200/-, which was confirmed by the ld.CIT(A). 40. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. ITA No.685/Hyd/2020 – A.Y. 2018-19 41. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a private limited company engaged in the business of construction and sale of residential

KASUSALYA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 681/HYD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

disallowance of finance charges amounting to Rs.95,48,200/-, which was confirmed by the ld.CIT(A). 40. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. ITA No.685/Hyd/2020 – A.Y. 2018-19 41. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a private limited company engaged in the business of construction and sale of residential

KASUSALYA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 682/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

disallowance of finance charges amounting to Rs.95,48,200/-, which was confirmed by the ld.CIT(A). 40. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. ITA No.685/Hyd/2020 – A.Y. 2018-19 41. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a private limited company engaged in the business of construction and sale of residential

KASUSALYA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 685/HYD/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

disallowance of finance charges amounting to Rs.95,48,200/-, which was confirmed by the ld.CIT(A). 40. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. ITA No.685/Hyd/2020 – A.Y. 2018-19 41. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a private limited company engaged in the business of construction and sale of residential

A.P. GRAMEENA VIKAS BANK,WARANGAL vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 417/HYD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Darshan Jakaria, CAFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)Section 40Section 41Section 41(1)Section 92C

section 41 are not applicable. 3. The Learned CIT(A) ought to have directed the Assessing Officer to verify whether the amount under consideration pertains to write-off or write back and once it is found that the amount pertains to write off, no addition to be made in this regard.” 3. As the facts and issues

A.P. GRAMEENA VIKAS BANK,WARANGAL vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 419/HYD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Darshan Jakaria, CAFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)Section 40Section 41Section 41(1)Section 92C

section 41 are not applicable. 3. The Learned CIT(A) ought to have directed the Assessing Officer to verify whether the amount under consideration pertains to write-off or write back and once it is found that the amount pertains to write off, no addition to be made in this regard.” 3. As the facts and issues

A.P. GRAMEENA VIKAS BANK,WARANGAL vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 418/HYD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Darshan Jakaria, CAFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)Section 40Section 41Section 41(1)Section 92C

section 41 are not applicable. 3. The Learned CIT(A) ought to have directed the Assessing Officer to verify whether the amount under consideration pertains to write-off or write back and once it is found that the amount pertains to write off, no addition to be made in this regard.” 3. As the facts and issues

A.P. GRAMEENA VIKAS BANK,WARANGAL vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 420/HYD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Darshan Jakaria, CAFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)Section 40Section 41Section 41(1)Section 92C

section 41 are not applicable. 3. The Learned CIT(A) ought to have directed the Assessing Officer to verify whether the amount under consideration pertains to write-off or write back and once it is found that the amount pertains to write off, no addition to be made in this regard.” 3. As the facts and issues

CASPIAN IMPACT INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 749/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.749/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Caspian Impact Vs. Dy.Cit Investments Private Ltd, Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aadcs4132K (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Hiten Thakkar, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 25/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By M/S. Caspian Impact Investments Private Limited, (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Addl/Jcit (A)-1, Mumbai (“Ld. First Appellate Authority”), Dated 27.02.2025 For The A.Y. 2019-20. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 43B

section 143(1)(a) of the Act has led to double disallowance, which is not sustainable. Accordingly, the addition of Rs.13,22,458/- is directed to be deleted. 12. On the disallowance of Rs.10,41

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD vs. AMSRI BUILDERS , SECUNDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for A

ITA 1897/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 28

41(1) of the Act. 17. Coming back to the additional grounds filed by the Revenue in light of provisions of Section 28(i) of the Act. The Revenue has raised additional grounds and challenged that the amount of advance received from Smith Group of Companies was appropriated by the assessee for the work done by it and other works

SINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LIMITED,KOTHAGUDEM vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-13(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 286/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.283, 284 & 286/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Singareni Collieries Vs. Acit, Circle – 1 Company Limited Khammam & Kothagudem Acit, Circle 13(1) Pan:Aaact8873F Hyderabad & आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.300, 301 & 308/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Vs. Dy. Cit, Circle 13(1) Hyderabad Singareni Collieries Company Limited Kothagudem Pan:Aaact8873F (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, Advocate राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By:: Shri B Balakrishna, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 10/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 12/06/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These 3 Sets Of Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Are Directed Against The 3 Separate Orders All Dated 30/01/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Ys 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21 Respectively. The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Have Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeals For 3 A.Ys:

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri B Balakrishna, CIT (DR)
Section 194Section 32ASection 37Section 40Section 40A(9)

Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Your Appellant submits that the CIT(A) as well as the Assessing Officer ignored the fact that the payments made to Singareni Educational Society in the past have been allowed as business expenditure u/s 37, ought not to have disallowed Rs. 41

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 731/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. TH. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80

41. Ground No. 2 of assessee’s appeal relates to the issue under section 115JB of the Act. On a perusal of record, it is found that this issue is identical to the Ground No. 2 in ITA No. 645/Hyd/2020, wherein the findings of the learned CIT(A) were set aside and the issue was restored to the file