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.

44 results for “disallowance”+ Section 80Gclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai476Delhi293Pune199Ahmedabad133Kolkata133Bangalore120Chennai108Jaipur52Hyderabad44Chandigarh26Indore25Lucknow25Surat14Rajkot12Cuttack11Ranchi9Raipur7Visakhapatnam6Cochin6Jodhpur5Nagpur4Amritsar3Telangana2Allahabad1Dehradun1Guwahati1Punjab & Haryana1SC1Jabalpur1Karnataka1Agra1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 80G92Section 80I54Section 143(3)31Disallowance23Addition to Income23Deduction23Section 12A18Section 1116Section 3713Section 37(1)

OPTUM GLOBAL SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 145/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AR
Section 135Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 37Section 80GSection 80G(2)

disallowed and added back in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. In terms of Section 135(5) of the Act read with Section 80G

Showing 1–20 of 44 · Page 1 of 3

12
Section 13512
Transfer Pricing12

OPTUM GLOBAL SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 482/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AR
Section 135Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 37Section 80GSection 80G(2)

disallowed and added back in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. In terms of Section 135(5) of the Act read with Section 80G

DELOITTE & TOUCHE ASSURANCE & ENTERPRISE RISK SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 342/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri SP. Chidambaram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR
Section 135Section 135(5)Section 30Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80GSection 80G(2)

disallowed and added back in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. In terms of Section 135(5) of the Act read with Section 80G

DELOITTEE TAX SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 341/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri SP. Chidambaram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR
Section 135Section 135(5)Section 30Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80GSection 80G(2)

disallowed and added back in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. In terms of Section 135(5) of the Act read with Section 80G

POWER MECH PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 155/HYD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Aug 2023AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri P. Vinod, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 12ASection 135Section 135(5)Section 30Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80GSection 80G(2)

disallowed and added back in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. In terms of Section 135(5) of the Act read with Section 80G

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1084/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Sourabh Soparkar, Advocate Represented by Department : Dr. Narendra Kumar NFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 11/11/2025
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 68Section 80Section 801ASection 80GSection 92C

disallowance under section 14A of the Act; (ii). allowability of the assessee's claim for deduction under section 80G in respect

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1083/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Sood(Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1083/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Vs. Penna Cement Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcp2290D (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Industries आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1084/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year:2018-19) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hydeabad. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Vs. Penna Cement Industries Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcp2290D (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) करदाताकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Sourabh Soparkar, Advocate राजस्वकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाईसमाप्तहोनेकीतिथि/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 11/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 2

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 68Section 80Section 801ASection 80GSection 92C

disallowance under section 14A of the Act; (ii). allowability of the assessee's claim for deduction under section 80G in respect

NETCRACKER TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE - 5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations given hereinabove

ITA 730/HYD/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Dec 2025

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 92C(3)

disallowance of expenditure claimed under Section 37 of the Act and by no stretch of the imagination can be extended to the deduction claimed under Section 80G

ADP PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD, TELANGANA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD, TELANGANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations given hereinabove

ITA 332/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

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

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 195(2)Section 40

disallowance of CSR expenditure claimed under Section 80G of the Act for Rs. 1,46,48,034/-, disallowance under Section

HSBC ELECTRONIC DATA PROCESSING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 302/HYD/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.302/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Hsbc Electronic Data Processing Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Hyderabad Circle-2(1) [Pan : Aaach8235M] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Ms.Nusrath Farheen, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Mr.Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80G

disallowing deduction under section 80G of the Act. Apart from this, learned Assessing Officer did not grant refund of excess

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. HSBC ELECTRONIC DATA PROCESSING INDIA PVT. LTD.,, MADHAPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 337/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.302/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Hsbc Electronic Data Processing Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Hyderabad Circle-2(1) [Pan : Aaach8235M] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Ms.Nusrath Farheen, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Mr.Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80G

disallowing deduction under section 80G of the Act. Apart from this, learned Assessing Officer did not grant refund of excess

ZAHEER AHMED SYED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CC-2(2), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 410/HYD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

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

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80G

disallowance of donation. In response, the assessee submitted that, he has paid donation under CSR initiative for charitable purpose and in support of his arguments, filed the registration details of R.R. 4 Zaheer Ahmed Syed Charitable trust under Section 80G

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

80G of the Act, which is a distinct and independent provision. They do not lay down any proposition that CSR expenditure is allowable under section 37(1) in view of the statutory prohibition contained in Explanation 2. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the action of the Ld. AO in disallowing

INVESCO(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2 (1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 111/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, Sriram SeshadriFor Respondent: Shri B Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

disallowance offered by the Appellant in its return of income and the Hon'ble 6 ITA.No.111/Hyd./2022 DRP further erred in upholding the said action of the Ld. AO. 5. Without prejudice to Grounds 4 & 5 above, that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD vs. COUNTRY CLUB HOSPITALITY & HOLIDAYS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1045/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahu(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohana RaoFor Respondent: Shri B. Balakrishna. (D.R.)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80G

section 80G claim as well as other deduction i.e. travelling, conveyance expenses and miscellaneous expenses of Rs.1,59,354; Rs.32,43,051 and Rs.3 lakhs respectively, totaling to Rs.37,02,405. 6. Learned counsel stated very clearly that the assessee is not pressing for the first and foremost head of 80G disallowance

TRINITY INFRAVENTURES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 2178/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi[Through Video Conferencing At Delhi] आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.2178/H/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Trinity Infra Ventures P. Murali & Company Chartered Accountants 6-3-655/2/3, First Floor Somajiguda, Hyderabad-82 ….. अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan No. Aabcg 1937 G Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-3(1), ….. "त् यथ"/Respondent Hyderabad

For Respondent: Shri Sunku Srinivasu, DR
Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80G(5)(vi)

disallowing the deduction claim u/s 80G for Rs.26,82,500/-. 6. The Ld CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the rule of one time approval u/s 80G would also I.T.A. No. 2178/H/2017 :- 3 -: apply to the assessee for the A.Y 2013-14 even though the impugned certificate in the assessee’s case has been issued on 25.06.2008 i.e., much

VITP PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE8(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 573/HYD/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.573 & 574/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Vitp Private Limited Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 8 (1) Pan:Aaccv2672G Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Advocates Percy Perdiwala & Mahima Goud राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By:: Shri Shahnawaz-Ul-Rahman, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 23/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 08/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: These Two Appeals Are Filed By Vitp Private Limited (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Hyderabad, (“Ld.Pcit”), Dated 30/03/2024 For The A.Y.2017-18. As Both The Appeals Are Interrelated & Belongs To The Same, Both Are Heard Together & One Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Appellant: Advocates Percy Perdiwala andFor Respondent: : Shri Shahnawaz-ul-Rahman
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(3)Section 263Section 80Section 801A

disallowed. This excess WDV resuted in excess claim of depreciation of Rs.3,37,71,787/-. 4 ITA Nos 573 and 5754 of 2024 VIP Private Limited ii. As per Schedule CYLA of ITR of AY 2017-18 (page 47), the assessee has a business income of Rs 7,42,25,071/-, short term capital gain

NATCO PHARMA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 853/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri A V Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 35Section 41Section 80Section 92CSection 92D(3)

disallowance under section 14A of the Act cannot exceed the exempt income of Rs.4,99,429/-, earned by the Assessee during the relevant previous year. 6. The Id. AO/DRP erred in law and on facts in rejecting the request of the Appellant for allowing deduction of Rs.2,50,000 under section 80G

CHILDREN OF DECCAN FOUNDATION,HYDERABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1767/HYD/2019[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Apr 2021

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai, (D.R.)
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G(5)(vi)

section 12AA and 80G registration(s), we notice that with able assistance coming from learned CIT, DR that he has declined the impugned former relief mainly on the ground that the corresponding orphanage hostel building’s lease is an unregistered one. He has not dealt with the assessee's object clauses as to under which limb they fall

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF CONSTRUCTION,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 445/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S.Godara

For Appellant: Shri C.S.Subramanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.Sunil Goutam, DR
Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 80G

80G for the current year. Such registrations were in force for the A.Y.2015-2016 as well as till the date of filing of this appeal. The appellant is a charitable entity carrying on the activity of skill development training and education mainly in the construction field operating in the state of Telangana. It runs various training camps all over the state