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.

2 results for “disallowance”+ Section 54Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai22Delhi19Bangalore10Jaipur9Kolkata7Ahmedabad5Agra5Karnataka4Pune4Rajkot3Jodhpur2Hyderabad2Indore2Chennai2Raipur1Chandigarh1Surat1Cuttack1Amritsar1SC1Visakhapatnam1Nagpur1

Key Topics

Section 54E9Section 143(1)6Section 10A5Section 139(1)2Exemption2Deduction2Disallowance2

DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. DBS TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 151/HYD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Dbs Technology Income Tax, Services India Private Circle – 8(1), Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aafcd5584N (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No.2/Hyd/2023 Assessment Year 2019-20 Dbs Technology Services India Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Circle – 8(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aafcd5584N (Cross Objector / (Appellant/Revenue) Respondent) Assessee By: Sri M. P. Lohia, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.07.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, Jm: The Appeal & Cross-Objection Filed By The Revenue For A.Y. 2019-20 Arise From The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi

For Appellant: Sri M. P. Lohia, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)

54D or section 54EC or section 54F or section 54G or section 54GA or section 54GB] or Chapter VI-A exceeded the maximum amount which is not chargeable to income-tax, shall, on or before the due date, furnish a return of his income or the income of such other person during the previous year, in the prescribed form

ITO, WARD-4(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. SUBRAHMANYAM KOTIKALAPUDI, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 269/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14 Income-Tax Officer, Vs. Subrahmanyam Kotikalapudi, Ward – 4(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad.

For Appellant: Smt Geetinder MannFor Respondent: Smt. Komali Krishna
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 54Section 54BSection 54E

54D, 54G and 54GA. Against the notice u/s 143(2) issued by the AO, the AR of the assessee filed the required information. 2.1 The AO observed that the assessee claimed deduction u/s 54EC to the extent of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- for one sale transaction i.e. sale property at Plot