ITAT Hyderabad Judgments — April 2023

SHANTHA NATARAJAN, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 2046/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that additions cannot be made solely on the basis of a third party's statement without corroborative evidence, especially when the assessee was not given an opportunity for cross-examination. The procedure under section 153C was also not followed.

NANDAN CLEANTEC LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 516/HYD/2020[2016-17]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2016-17Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that since the cash withdrawn from the assessee company was deposited into the accounts of related parties and both companies shared common management, the addition under Section 68 was not warranted. The CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition was upheld.

NANDAN CLEANTEC LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 515/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2013-14Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that since the cash withdrawn from the assessee company was deposited into the accounts of related parties and both companies shared common management, the addition under Section 68 was not warranted. The CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition was upheld.

NANDAN CLEANTEC LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 514/HYD/2020[2012-13]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2012-13Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that since the cash withdrawn from the assessee company was deposited into the accounts of related parties and both companies shared common management, the addition under Section 68 was not warranted. The CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition was upheld.

NANDAN CLEANTEC LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 517/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2017-18Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that since the cash withdrawn from the assessee company was deposited into the accounts of related parties and both companies shared common management, the addition under Section 68 was not warranted. The CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition was upheld.

COUNTRY CLUB HOSPITALITY & HOLIDAYS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, TDS CIRCLE (TDS)-1(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 631/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2018-19Remanded

The Tribunal held that the assessee's grievance regarding unconsumed challans and potential TDS deficiency needed verification by the Assessing Officer. The matter was restored to the AO to consider the correction statement of TDS linking unconsumed challans.

COUNTRY CLUB HOSPITALITY & HOLIDAYS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs ACIT TDS, CIRCLE (TDS)-1(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 632/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2019-20Remanded

The Tribunal held that the assessee's grievance regarding unconsumed challans and potential TDS deficiency needed verification by the Assessing Officer. The matter was restored to the AO to consider the correction statement of TDS linking unconsumed challans.

GKC PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 552/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2017-18Partly Allowed

The tribunal held that interest on foreign currency loans should be based on market-determined rates for the currency of repayment, not the domestic PLR, referencing the Delhi High Court's decision in CIT vs. Cotton Naturals. For interest-free loans to subsidiaries, it was deemed a revenue-neutral transaction, impacting the government exchequer negligibly.

HARISH BHATT NATARAJAN,HYDERABAD vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 2050/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that additions cannot be made solely on the basis of a third party's statement without corroborative evidence, especially when the assessee was not given an opportunity for cross-examination. The procedure under section 153C was also not followed.

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD vs OMEGA SHELTERS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1137/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2013-14Partly Allowed

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Hyderabad Bench decided to modify its previous order to reflect the correct PAN and address of the assessee, Omega Shelters (P) Ltd. This correction does not alter the substantive decision of the appeals.

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

ITA 1187/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2014-15Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition under Section 56(2)(viia) as it applies to shares received for less than fair market value, even in cases of amalgamation, unless specifically excluded. The Tribunal also noted that the CIT(A) had not decided the assessee's grounds on merit regarding the calculation of additions under Section 56(2)(viia).

SIDDA VENKATA SURYA PRAKASA RAO,ONGOLE vs ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ONGOLE

ITA 423/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2015-16Allowed

The Tribunal held that the order passed under section 263 without a DIN, or without quoting it, is invalid and deemed to have never been issued as per CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 and the Delhi High Court's decision in CIT vs. Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd. The subsequent communication of the DIN does not validate the original order.

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD vs REJUVENTING APPROACHES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 558/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2013-14Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that since the cash withdrawn from the assessee company was deposited into the accounts of related parties and both companies shared common management, the addition under Section 68 was not warranted. The CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition was upheld.

GKC PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 421/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2018-19Partly Allowed

The tribunal held that interest on foreign currency loans should be based on market-determined rates for the currency of repayment, not the domestic PLR, referencing the Delhi High Court's decision in CIT vs. Cotton Naturals. For interest-free loans to subsidiaries, it was deemed a revenue-neutral transaction, impacting the government exchequer negligibly.

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs NANITHA CONSTRUCTIONS, HYDERABAD

ITA 504/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2019-20Dismissed

The Tribunal held that a statement made during a survey under Section 133A, without corroborative evidence or defects in the books of account, cannot be the sole basis for an addition. The admission was not based on any incriminating material found.

COUNTRY CLUB HOSPITALITY & HOLIDAYS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs ACIT TDS, CIRCLE(TDS-1(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 633/HYD/2022[2020-21]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2020-21Remanded

The Tribunal held that the assessee's grievance regarding unconsumed challans and potential TDS deficiency needed verification by the Assessing Officer. The matter was restored to the AO to consider the correction statement of TDS linking unconsumed challans.

PALABATHUNI CHANDRA RAVI,RAMASAMUDRAM vs ITO, WARD-1, MADANAPALLE

ITA 659/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2017-18Remanded

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and, considering the assessee's non-compliance with statutory notices by the CIT(A), restored the issue to the CIT(A) for one last opportunity to substantiate the case.

HARISH KUMAR MURALIDHAR HARWANI,HYDERABAD vs INCOME TAX OFFICERS,WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 69/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2016-17Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the PCIT was not justified in invoking Section 263 regarding low income from liquor trade as the assessee provided details and the AO took a possible view. However, the PCIT was justified in invoking Section 263 regarding non-verification of capital introduction and withdrawal.

SRIMATHI PICHARA,KARIMNAGAR vs ITO, WARD-3, KARIMNAGAR

ITA 114/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2017-18Remanded

The Tribunal quashed the orders of the lower authorities and restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The assessee was granted a final opportunity to produce all relevant documents.

ICOMM TELE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 130/HYD/2023[2014-15]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2014-15Partly Allowed

The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of delayed employee contributions to PF & ESI, citing Supreme Court judgments. For the ad-hoc disallowance on expenses, the Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer to allow the assessee to furnish evidence.

YEDDULA HARSHA VARDHAN REDDY,HYDERABAD vs DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 145/HYD/2023[2021-22]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2021-22Partly Allowed

The Tribunal accepted the assessee's explanation regarding the Rs. 4 lakh cash, considering the family's financial status and the medical needs of elderly members. The addition of Rs. 15,600/- under Section 80D was confirmed due to lack of evidence.

RAMA KANDUKURI,ADILABAD vs ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 153/HYD/2023[2020-21]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2020-21Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order after the assessee failed to appear despite multiple opportunities. To ensure justice, the Tribunal restored the issue to the CIT(A) for one last opportunity to the assessee.

VENKAT RAM REDDY DAMANNAGARI,SECUNDERABAD vs ITO, WARD-10(5), HYDERABAD

ITA 154/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2017-18Partly Allowed

The Tribunal found the disallowance percentages to be on the higher side and directed the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance on all expenses to 15% uniformly, considering the nature of expenses and to meet the ends of justice.

SAATHWIK REDDY MEDA,HYDERABAD vs DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 2/HYD/2023[2020-21]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2020-21Remanded

The Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restored the issue to the Assessing Officer. The assessee is given a final opportunity to produce evidence regarding business activity and savings.

ICOMM TELE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 60/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2018-19Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the disallowance of delayed employees' contribution to PF & ESI under Section 36(1)(va) was correct, following the Supreme Court judgment in Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. However, the issue of ad-hoc disallowance on expenses was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh verification.

HARISH BHATT NATARAJAN, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 2049/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2009-10Allowed

The Tribunal held that the Net Worth Statement prepared by a Chartered Accountant alone cannot be the basis for making an addition without corroborative evidence, especially when it contradicts the registered sale deed and wealth tax return. The Revenue failed to provide evidence of 'on money' payment or examine the Chartered Accountant.

DCIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs OMEGA SHELTERS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ITA 612/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Hyderabad Bench decided to modify its previous order to reflect the correct PAN and address of the assessee, Omega Shelters (P) Ltd. This correction does not alter the substantive decision of the appeals.

DAFFODILS AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 135/HYD/2021[2012-13]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2012-13Dismissed

The Tribunal upheld the addition of Rs. 79,68,000/- (including registration expenses) as unexplained investment. The court found that the assessee failed to provide any evidence to substantiate the claim that directors paid the amount on behalf of the company.

AUROBINDO PHARMA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

ITA 485/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2018-19Partly Allowed

The Tribunal allowed the weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) for clinical trial expenses, following its own earlier decisions and the approval granted by the relevant authority. The appeal was partly allowed.

DAFFODILS AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 136/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2015-16Dismissed

The Tribunal upheld the addition of Rs. 79,68,000/- (including registration expenses) as unexplained investment. The court found that the assessee failed to provide any evidence to substantiate the claim that directors paid the amount on behalf of the company.

GONUGUNTLA NIRMALA DEVI,ANNATAPUR vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR

ITA 413/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2016-17Remanded

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not provide sufficient opportunity to the assessee, especially regarding the rejoinder to the remand report. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after granting one more opportunity to the assessee.

VASUDEVA REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE2-(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 137/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2015-16Dismissed

The Tribunal upheld the addition of Rs. 79,68,000/- (including registration expenses) as unexplained investment. The court found that the assessee failed to provide any evidence to substantiate the claim that directors paid the amount on behalf of the company.

AGRI GOLD FARM ESTATES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 1669/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2013-14Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the inability of the assessee to diligently prosecute proceedings was due to the custody of responsible personnel. Following similar past decisions for group concerns, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD vs PRAVARDHAN SEEDS PRIAVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 2091/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the assessee's activities, including sowing, weeding, and irrigation, constitute agricultural operations as defined under Section 2(1A) of the Act. Merely because the seeds are sold commercially does not negate the agricultural nature of the basic operations.

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs AGRI GOLD FARM ESTATES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1177/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2015-16Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the inability of the assessee to diligently prosecute proceedings was due to the custody of responsible personnel. Following similar past decisions for group concerns, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders.

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs AGRI GOLD FARM ESTATES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1174/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2012-13Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the inability of the assessee to diligently prosecute proceedings was due to the custody of responsible personnel. Following similar past decisions for group concerns, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders.

AGRI GOLD FARM ESTATES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 1887/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2015-16Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the inability of the assessee to diligently prosecute proceedings was due to the custody of responsible personnel. Following similar past decisions for group concerns, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders.

AGRI GOLD FARM ESTATES INDIA PRIVATE LIMTED,HYDERABAD vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 1670/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2014-15Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the inability of the assessee to diligently prosecute proceedings was due to the custody of responsible personnel. Following similar past decisions for group concerns, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders.

AGRI GOLD FARM ESTATES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 1222/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2010-11Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the inability of the assessee to diligently prosecute proceedings was due to the custody of responsible personnel. Following similar past decisions for group concerns, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders.

OCIMUM BIO SOLUTIONS (I) LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs ACIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ITA 280/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2011-12Partly Allowed

The Tribunal directed the AO to verify if reimbursement of expenses was a balance sheet entry and delete the addition if so. The issue of trade advances was restored to the AO/TPO for verification of business expediency. The ALP for corporate guarantee was fixed at 0.53%, and the addition for interest on TDS was directed to be deleted.

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs LINGIAH AMIDYALA, HYDERABAD

ITA 702/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2019-20Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the addition made by the Assessing Officer was based solely on a 'dumb document' without corroborative evidence. Since both the assessee and the buyers denied the transaction, and the document lacked essential details, the presumption under Section 292C was rebutted.

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs AGRI GOLD FOODS FARM ESTATES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 796/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2010-11Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the inability of the assessee to diligently prosecute proceedings was due to the custody of responsible personnel. Following similar past decisions for group concerns, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 16(1), HYDERABAD vs SIVA PRASAD NIDAMARTHY, HYDERABAD

ITA 94/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2015-16Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the assessee had sufficiently discharged the onus of establishing the creditworthiness of M/s. Royal Home Constructions and the genuineness of the transaction. The CIT(Appeals) was justified in deleting the additions based on the evidence presented.

SUKESH GUPTA,HYDERABAD vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD

ITA 66/HYD/2022[2006-07]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2006-07Partly Allowed

The Tribunal acknowledged that the assessee had declared a substantial income and had filed returns regularly. While the assessee did not sufficiently prove the source of investment before the lower authorities, the Tribunal considered the long period elapsed and restricted the addition.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE -5(1), HYDERABAD vs SIVA PRASAD NIDAMARTHY,HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ITA 114/HYD/2021[2014-15]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2014-15Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the assessee had sufficiently discharged the onus of establishing the creditworthiness of M/s. Royal Home Constructions and the genuineness of the transaction. The CIT(Appeals) was justified in deleting the additions based on the evidence presented.

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs AGRI GOLD FARM ESTATES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1176/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2014-15Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the inability of the assessee to diligently prosecute proceedings was due to the custody of responsible personnel. Following similar past decisions for group concerns, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders.

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs AGRI GOLD FARM ESTATES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1175/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2013-14Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the inability of the assessee to diligently prosecute proceedings was due to the custody of responsible personnel. Following similar past decisions for group concerns, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders.

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs AGRI GOLD FARM ESTATES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 214/HYD/2018[2009/10]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the inability of the assessee to diligently prosecute proceedings was due to the custody of responsible personnel. Following similar past decisions for group concerns, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders.

AGRI GOLD FARM ESTATES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 202/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2009-10Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the inability of the assessee to diligently prosecute proceedings was due to the custody of responsible personnel. Following similar past decisions for group concerns, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders.

AGRI GOLD FARM ESTATES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 1224/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2012-13Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the inability of the assessee to diligently prosecute proceedings was due to the custody of responsible personnel. Following similar past decisions for group concerns, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders.