SANGEETA AKKARAJU CHANDRASEKHAR,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit In Support Of The Condonation Petition, Wherein She Has Mentioned The Reasons For The Delay & Submitted That The Delay Occurred Due To Factors Beyond Her Control, With No Deliberate Intention To Defer The Filing Of The Appeal. On The Other Hand, The Learned Senior A.R. For The Revenue, Shri Mathivanan, S.A. Did Not Strongly Oppose The Condonation Of Delay Petition Filed By The Assessee.

disallowance of deduction under Chapter VI-A towards deduction under Section 80C for LIC payments and deduction under Section 80TTA

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section include: 1. Mathematical Errors - Correction of any arithmetical or clerical errors in the return. 2. Incorrect Claims - Disallowance of incorrect claims that are apparent from the information provided in the return. 3. Disallowance of Losses - If carried-forward losses or deductions are claimed without filing the required supporting documents or returns in previous years. 4. Deduction Disallowance

PODDUTURI RAJASHEKHAR REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

disallowance of the assessee’s claim for deductions under Section 80C and Section 80D of the Act. 9. The Pr. CIT, after

VEERA REDDY POSHAM,NALGONDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.No.1830/Hyd

disallowance of\nRs.35,000 claimed u/s 80C without appreciating that the\npayments towards tuition fees were duly made and eligible\nunder section

RASHID HUSSAIN,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

disallowance of the assessee’s claim for deduction under section 80C of the Act: Rs.1,50,000/-; and (ii) disallowance

VEERA REDDY POSHAM,NALGONDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.No.1830/Hyd

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.Nos.1829 & 1830/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2020-2021 & 2022-2023 Veera Reddy Posham, The Acit, Nalgonda – 508 246 Central Circle-1(1), Vs. Telangana. Hyderabad. Telangana. Pan Aijpp0376P (Applicant) (Respondent) -None- िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By : राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13.03.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

section 250(6) and the principles of natural justice.  The order of the learned CIT(A) is non-speaking, cryptic, and contrary to the settled law that every appellate order must deal with each ground with reasons. 4 ITA.Nos.1829 & 1830/Hyd./2025 D. Disallowance of Deduction u/s 80C

THOTA RAMAIAH L/R T VASUNDHARA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowed the entire amount invoking provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act. Assessing Officer also found that though assessee claimed deduction u/s 80C

KOLLURU VENKATESH,SECUNDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2017-18 Kolluru Venkatesh, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Secunderabad. Ward – 11(3), Hyderabad. Pan : Cdopk7445J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. S. Sandhya, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Sadanala Srinath, Sr.Ar. Date Of Hearing: 05.02.2025 11.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement:

disallowance of Rs. 1,22,57,000/- under section 40A(3). The assessee also claimed a deduction under Chapter VI-A of Rs. 1,53,082/-, including Rs. 1,28,900/- under section 80C

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. NSL RENEWABLE POWER PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

80C to Section 80U of the Act shall be allowed from his ‘gross total income’. Sub-section (2) of Section 80A of the Act provides that the aggregate amount of the deductions under Chapter VI-A shall not exceed the ‘gross total income’ of the Assessee. We are in agreement with the Appellate Authority that Section NSL Renewable Power

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. NSL RENEWABLE POWER PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

80C to Section 80U of the Act shall be allowed from his ‘gross total income’. Sub-section (2) of Section 80A of the Act provides that the aggregate amount of the deductions under Chapter VI-A shall not exceed the ‘gross total income’ of the Assessee. We are in agreement with the Appellate Authority that Section NSL Renewable Power

RAMESH BABU SEGU,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(1), HYDERABAD.

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.137/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19) Ramesh Babu Segu, Vs. Acit, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(1), Pan: Amrps2069N Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Sri K A Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "वारा/Revenue By:: Ms. Payal Gupta, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 11/02/2026 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pronouncement: 13/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Ramesh Babu Segu (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 19/11/2024 For The Assessment Year (“A.Y.”) 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grouds Of Appeal:

disallowance under section 80C of the Act. Accordingly, the assessment was completed by the Ld. AO under section 153C of the Act vide

VENKATA SWAMY KATAKAM,JAYASHANKAR BHUPALPALLY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARANGAL

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

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 124/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Venkata Swamy Katakam, Income Tax Officer, Jangedu, Bhupalpally Vs. Ward-2, [Pan : Amupk5536B] Warangal अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

disallowance under section 80C of the Act. 5. With regard to Grounds No. 3 & 4, the learned AR submitted that

MOHAMMED IMRAN PATNI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

disallowed under section 80C of the Income Tax Act.” 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his return of income

MOHAMMED IMRAN PATNI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABADQ

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

disallowed under section 80C of the Income Tax Act.” 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his return of income

MOHAMMED IMRAN PATNI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

disallowed under section 80C of the Income Tax Act.” 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his return of income

MOHAMMED IMRAN PATNI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

disallowed under section 80C of the Income Tax Act.” 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his return of income

MOHAMMED IMRAN PATNI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

disallowed under section 80C of the Income Tax Act.” 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his return of income

MOHAMMED IMRAN PATNI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

disallowed under section 80C of the Income Tax Act.” 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his return of income