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 “reassessment”+ Section 80C(2)(xvii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Hyderabad2Delhi1Lucknow1

Key Topics

Section 106Section 1474Section 1484Section 80C4Section 143(3)2Section 250(6)2Section 80C(2)(xvii)2Section 234F2Exemption2Deduction2Penalty2Reassessment2

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

In the result, ITA.No.1830/Hyd

ITA 1830/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

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:

For Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234FSection 250(6)Section 270ASection 80C
Section 80C(2)(xvii)

2)(xvii).  The authorities below failed to call for or verify the documentary evidence before making the disallowance; the addition is therefore unjustified and liable to be deleted. E. Disallowance of HRA Exemption u/s 10(13A) - Rs.1,08,000  The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance of Rs.1,08,000 claimed u/s 10(13A) towards House Rent Allowance, ignoring

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

ITA 1829/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita.Nos.1829 & 1830/Hyd/2025

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234FSection 250(6)Section 270ASection 80CSection 80C(2)(xvii)

reassessment order is void ab initio and liable to be quashed. C. Violation of Natural Justice • The learned CIT(A) grossly erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte, ignoring that sufficient and reasonable opportunities were not effectively granted or that the appellant was prevented by reasonable cause from compliance. • The learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the appeal