Search: disallowance | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

571 results for “disallowance”+ Section 72clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,021 Delhi3,358 Bangalore1,122 Chennai1,067 Ahmedabad960 Kolkata850 Pune589 Jaipur574 Hyderabad571 Indore350 Chandigarh295 Surat259 Cochin218 Visakhapatnam164 Rajkot164 Raipur149 Cuttack131 Amritsar101 Nagpur98 Lucknow80 Karnataka66 Ranchi55 Guwahati52 Calcutta43 Allahabad43 Panaji39 Jodhpur33 Dehradun23 SC22 Agra20 Telangana18 Jabalpur17 Varanasi12 Patna11 Kerala8 Punjab & Haryana5 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 Rajasthan1 RANJAN GOGOI PRAFULLA C. PANT1 Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Addition to Income83 Section 143(3)79 Section 13254 Section 153A50 Search & Seizure40 Disallowance39 Section 6838 Section 37(1)38 Section 234A27

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)

disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.4,16,72,042/- under Section

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

Showing 1–20 of 571 · Page 1 of 29

...

Section 143(2)23

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)

disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.4,16,72,042/- under Section

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)

disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.4,16,72,042/- under Section

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)

disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.4,16,72,042/- under Section

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)

disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.4,16,72,042/- under Section

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

disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules shall not exceed the exempt Page 10 of 22 ITA No. 385 & 386/Hyd/2015 income earned during the year under consideration. These grounds are accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 23. Next coming to the addition on account of long term capital gains, the grievance

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

disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules shall not exceed the exempt Page 10 of 22 ITA No. 385 & 386/Hyd/2015 income earned during the year under consideration. These grounds are accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 23. Next coming to the addition on account of long term capital gains, the grievance

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

disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules shall not exceed the exempt Page 10 of 22 ITA No. 385 & 386/Hyd/2015 income earned during the year under consideration. These grounds are accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 23. Next coming to the addition on account of long term capital gains, the grievance

KAUSALYA AGRO FARMS AMD DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of our above findings

ITA 804/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)(a)Section 36(1)(iii)

disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. 10.4 As far as the other investments which are not covered in terms of commercial expediency, the assessee in his alternate plea has submitted that, the total impugned investment made by the assessee was Rs.12,72

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

disallowed ROC charges paid of Rs. 5,72,481/- on the ground that, the expenditure incurred towards increase in authorised capital of the assessee company is capital in nature and the same cannot be allowed under Section

SHELADIA ASSOCIATES INC,SD ROAD vs. ADIT(INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

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

ITA 537/HYD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 537/Hyd/2023 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Sheladia Associates Inc, Adit (Int Taxn)-2, Secunderabad Vs. Hyderabad [Pan No. Aafcs7792F] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Aluru V. Sai Sudha, ARFor Respondent: Ms. L. Sunitha Rao, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 37Section 44C

72,84,429/- under section 37 of the Act, Rs. 1,60,78,394/- under section 44C of the Act and Rs. 1,03,35,005/- disallowing

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 285/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.285/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2018-19) M/S. Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle 13(1), Hyderabad. Kothagudem. Pan:Aaact8873F (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.307/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2018-19) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd., Circle 13(1), Hyderabad. Vs. Kothagudem. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri M.V. Anil Kumar, Advocate & Shri C.H.Venkatesh, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Ms.U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 25/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Anil Kumar, Advocate and Shri C.H.Venkatesh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms.U. Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144B

section 43B of the Act. In this regard, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had to made disallowance of Rs.915,17,72

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 307/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.285/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2018-19) M/S. Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle 13(1), Hyderabad. Kothagudem. Pan:Aaact8873F (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.307/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2018-19) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd., Circle 13(1), Hyderabad. Vs. Kothagudem. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri M.V. Anil Kumar, Advocate & Shri C.H.Venkatesh, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Ms.U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 25/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Anil Kumar, Advocate and Shri C.H.Venkatesh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms.U. Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144B

section 43B of the Act. In this regard, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had to made disallowance of Rs.915,17,72

BRIGHTCOM GROUP LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 1747/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 37Section 92C

disallowances under section 14A of the Act, Rs.18,72,836/- on account of disallowances under section 37 of the Act towards

ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERABAD vs. KESAVA KUMAR KUNAPUREDDY, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 937/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 139(1)Section 54ESection 54F

disallowed the claim of the assessee as per the provisions of Section 54F(4) of the Act, 1961. Further, the assessee has also proved by filing relevant evidence that, the amount represented TDS of Rs.1,72

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(1), HYDERABAD vs. VERTEX PROJECTS LLP (FORMERLY M/S VERTEX PROJECTS LTD) , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1187/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Acit,Circle-10(1) Vs. Vertex Projects Llp Room No.515, 5Th Floor, (Formerly M/S.Vertex A-Block, I.T.Towers, Projects Ltd.) A.C.Guards, #156-159, Paigah House Hyderabad. S.P.Road, Next To Pg College. Secunderabad-500 026. Pan : Aanfv0232C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sriram Seshadri, Ca Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar,Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.04.2023 O R D E R Per Shri Laliet Kumar, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Dated 16.03.2018 For The Ay 2014-15, On The Following Grounds :

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar,CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(3)Section 47Section 56Section 56(2)(viia)Section 56(2)(viiia)

disallowance of expenditure u/s 14A of the Act for an amount of Rs.82,72,958/- and had further added Rs.5,59,249,590/- under section

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)

72 or sub- section (1) or sub-section (3) of section 74, in so far as such loss relates to the business of the undertaking, shall be carried forward or set off where such loss relates to any of the relevant assessment years 16[ending before the 1st day of April, 2001]; (iii) no deduction shall be allowed under section

ROCKSALT INTERACTIVE GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2) , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 403/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarm/S. Rocksalt Interactive Income Tax Officer, Vs. Games Pvt. Ltd., Ward 3(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan Aafcr3033A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. Respondent By : Shri Vijay Bhaskar Reddy, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.12.2022 O R D E R Per Shri Laliet Kumar, J.M. : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dt.30.03.2020 Of The Learned Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax/Cit-3, Hyderabad Relating To Assessment Year 2015-16 U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Bhaskar

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 263Section 72Section 73Section 73ASection 74Section 74ASection 80

72, or sub-section (2) of section 73, or sub-section (2) of section 73A or sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) of section 74, or sub-section (3) of section 74A, he may furnish, within the time allowed under sub-section (1) under sub-section (1), a return of loss in the prescribed form and verified

ROLON SEALS INTERNATIONAL,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 947/HYD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.947/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2023-2024 Rolon Seals International, The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad – 500 063. Vs. Ward-11(1), Telangana. Hyderabad. Pan Aarfr2216G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri Sashank Dundu, Advocate राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: G Saratha, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri Sashank Dundu, AdvocateFor Respondent: G Saratha, Sr. AR

Section 10ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

disallowance referring to sub-sections (5) & (6) of section 10A/10B of the 1.T. Act, which are applicable to the deduction u/s 10AA of the I.T. Act also. The provisions of sub-sections (5) & (6) of section 10A of the LT. Act shall apply to the exemption u/s 10AA of the I.T. Act also by virtue of sub-section

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

In the result, assessee’s appeals for the A

ITA 300/HYD/2024[2015--16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.283, 284 & 286/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/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 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Vs. Singareni Collieries Dy. Cit, Circle 13(1) Company Limited Hyderabad Kothagudem Pan:Aaact8873F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, Advocate राज" व "ारा/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)

72 and sub- section (3) of section 73, the allowance or the part of the allowance to which effect has not been given, as the case may be, shall be added to the amount of the allowance for depreciation for the following previous year and deemed to be part of that allowance, or if there is no such allowance