CIT v. B.R. Constructions

Csaterrpillar Global Mining Europe Gmbh, Godavarikhani vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-I (International Taxation), Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahu

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD ‘ A ’ BENCH, HYDERABAD. BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L. P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. & Appellant Respondent Asst. Year 610/Hyd/2014 M/s. Caterpillar Global Dy. Director of 2010-11 Mining Europe GMBH- Income Tax, India Project Office, International Karimnagar. Taxation-1, PAN AADCB4524A Hyderabad. 483/Hyd/2015 Dy. Commissioner of 2011-12 -do- Income Tax-1, International Taxation, Hyderabad. 2072/Hyd/2017 M/s. Caterpillar Global 2014-15 Mining Europe GMBH- India Project Office, -do- Godavarikhani, Peddapalli, Telangana. PAN AADCB4524A 1127/…

Catterpillar Mining Europe Gmbh-India Project Office, Karimnagar vs. DCIT-1, International Taxation, Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahu

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD ‘ A ’ BENCH, HYDERABAD. BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L. P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. & Appellant Respondent Asst. Year 610/Hyd/2014 M/s. Caterpillar Global Dy. Director of 2010-11 Mining Europe GMBH- Income Tax, India Project Office, International Karimnagar. Taxation-1, PAN AADCB4524A Hyderabad. 483/Hyd/2015 Dy. Commissioner of 2011-12 -do- Income Tax-1, International Taxation, Hyderabad. 2072/Hyd/2017 M/s. Caterpillar Global 2014-15 Mining Europe GMBH- India Project Office, -do- Godavarikhani, Peddapalli, Telangana. PAN AADCB4524A 1127/…

Caterpillar Global Mining Europe Gmbh-India Project Office, Karimnagar vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax (Internation Taxation-1), Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahu

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD ‘ A ’ BENCH, HYDERABAD. BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L. P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. & Appellant Respondent Asst. Year 610/Hyd/2014 M/s. Caterpillar Global Dy. Director of 2010-11 Mining Europe GMBH- Income Tax, India Project Office, International Karimnagar. Taxation-1, PAN AADCB4524A Hyderabad. 483/Hyd/2015 Dy. Commissioner of 2011-12 -do- Income Tax-1, International Taxation, Hyderabad. 2072/Hyd/2017 M/s. Caterpillar Global 2014-15 Mining Europe GMBH- India Project Office, -do- Godavarikhani, Peddapalli, Telangana. PAN AADCB4524A 1127/…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Gayatri Projects Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

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

…egoing Explanation as its business is in the nature of a “works contract” only. Reliance placed on all earlier orders (supra); not considering the statutory “Explanation(s)”, are not forced to be binding precedent in light of CIT Vs. B.R. Constructions (1993) 202 ITR 222 (AP). The Revenue’s lead appeal ITA 1331/Hyd/2017 is allowed and assessee’s cross-appeal ITA 1340/Hyd/2017 is dismissed in above terms. 6. Learned AR at this stage vehemently invited our attention to the fact that the assessee has filed a letter before the hon'ble President of the tribunal seeking to constitute a Special Bench u/s 255(3) of the…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Gayatri Projects Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

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

…egoing Explanation as its business is in the nature of a “works contract” only. Reliance placed on all earlier orders (supra); not considering the statutory “Explanation(s)”, are not forced to be binding precedent in light of CIT Vs. B.R. Constructions (1993) 202 ITR 222 (AP). The Revenue’s lead appeal ITA 1331/Hyd/2017 is allowed and assessee’s cross-appeal ITA 1340/Hyd/2017 is dismissed in above terms. 6. Learned AR at this stage vehemently invited our attention to the fact that the assessee has filed a letter before the hon'ble President of the tribunal seeking to constitute a Special Bench u/s 255(3) of the…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Gayatri Projects Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

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

…egoing Explanation as its business is in the nature of a “works contract” only. Reliance placed on all earlier orders (supra); not considering the statutory “Explanation(s)”, are not forced to be binding precedent in light of CIT Vs. B.R. Constructions (1993) 202 ITR 222 (AP). The Revenue’s lead appeal ITA 1331/Hyd/2017 is allowed and assessee’s cross-appeal ITA 1340/Hyd/2017 is dismissed in above terms. 6. Learned AR at this stage vehemently invited our attention to the fact that the assessee has filed a letter before the hon'ble President of the tribunal seeking to constitute a Special Bench u/s 255(3) of the…

Sandeep Dudala, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), Hyderabad

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2013-14 Mr. Sandeep Dudala, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward-7(1), Hyderabad. Pan No. Alqpd4836L. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Rohit Majumdar Date Of Hearing: 03.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.01.2022 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. This Assessee’S Appeal For A.Y. 2013-14 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 3, Hyderabad’S Order Dated 15.03.2019 In Ita No.0084/Ito-7(1)/Hyd/Cit(A)-3/2016- 17, Involving Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short, ‘The Act’]. Assessee Called Twice. None Appears At Assessee’S Behest. He Is Accordingly Proceeded Exparte. 2. We Notice With The Able Assistance Of Learned Departmental Representative That The Assessee’S Twin Substantive Grounds Raised Herein Seek To Reverse Both The Lower Authorities’ Action Estimating 5% Income In Retail Liquor Business & Unexplained Investment Addition Involving Varying Sums Of Rs.19,15,935/- & 37,35,000/-, Respectively.

…and 1206/Hyd/2015 had estimated 3% income in the very business which had also been upheld in the hon’ble jurisdictional high court as well. We hold that such an estimation could not be taken as a binding precedent in light of CIT Vs. B.R. Constructions (1993) 202 ITR 222(AP). We accordingly uphold both the lower authorities’ action estimating the assessee’s income @ 5% of the turnover. 4. Next comes the latter issue of unexplained investment amounting to Rs.37,35,000/-. Case file suggests that the assessee neither explained source thereof during the course of scrutiny nor in the CIT(A)’s order. The Assessing Off…

Gayatri Projects Limited, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyd, Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed therefore

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

…egoing Explanation as its business is in the nature of a “works contract” only. Reliance placed on all earlier orders (supra); not considering the statutory “Explanation(s)”, are not forced to be binding precedent in light of CIT Vs. B.R. Constructions (1993) 202 ITR 222 (AP). The Revenue’s lead appeal ITA 1331/Hyd/2017 is allowed and assessee’s cross-appeal ITA 1340/Hyd/2017 is dismissed in above terms. 8. We make it clear that we have decided the sole issue of section 80IA deduction in Revenue’s favour, all other pleadings on merits are rendered academic. 9. Same order to follow in remaining two years’ cross-…

Gayatri Projects Limited., Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4)., Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed therefore

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

…egoing Explanation as its business is in the nature of a “works contract” only. Reliance placed on all earlier orders (supra); not considering the statutory “Explanation(s)”, are not forced to be binding precedent in light of CIT Vs. B.R. Constructions (1993) 202 ITR 222 (AP). The Revenue’s lead appeal ITA 1331/Hyd/2017 is allowed and assessee’s cross-appeal ITA 1340/Hyd/2017 is dismissed in above terms. 8. We make it clear that we have decided the sole issue of section 80IA deduction in Revenue’s favour, all other pleadings on merits are rendered academic. 9. Same order to follow in remaining two years’ cross-…

Gayatri Projects Limited, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyd, Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed therefore

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

…egoing Explanation as its business is in the nature of a “works contract” only. Reliance placed on all earlier orders (supra); not considering the statutory “Explanation(s)”, are not forced to be binding precedent in light of CIT Vs. B.R. Constructions (1993) 202 ITR 222 (AP). The Revenue’s lead appeal ITA 1331/Hyd/2017 is allowed and assessee’s cross-appeal ITA 1340/Hyd/2017 is dismissed in above terms. 8. We make it clear that we have decided the sole issue of section 80IA deduction in Revenue’s favour, all other pleadings on merits are rendered academic. 9. Same order to follow in remaining two years’ cross-…

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Gvpr Engineers Limited, Hyderabad

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2013-14 Gvpr Engineers Limited, The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Income Tax, Chartered Accountants, Circle 2(2), 7A, Surya Towers, Hyderabad. S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Gvpr Engineers Limited, The Deputy Commissioner C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Of Income Tax, Chartered Accountants, Circle 2(2), 7A, Surya Towers, Hyderabad. S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Gvpr Engineers Limited, Of Income Tax, C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Circle 2(2), Chartered Accountants, Hyderabad. 7A, Surya Towers, S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross Appellant) Ita Nos.1576 & 1577/Hyd/2017 Gpvr Engineers Limited Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Gvpr Engineers Limited, Of Income Tax, C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Circle 2(2), Chartered Accountants, Hyderabad. 7A, Surya Towers, S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross Appellant) Assessee By: Shri M.V. Anil Kumar Revenue By: Smt. D. Komali Krishna Date Of Hearing: 27/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/11/2021 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. These Two Revenue & Assessee’S Cross Appeals I.E., Ita Nos.1576 & 1617/Hyd/2017 For A.Y. 2013-14 & Ita No.1577 & 1618/Hyd/2017 For A.Y. 2014-15 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Hyderabad’S Separate Orders Dt.30.06.2017 & 29.06.2017, Passed In Case Nos.0075 & 0436/2016-17, Respectively, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Act.

…ssment years, we find that the said bench(es) nowhere discuss the clinching operation of the following “Explanation” as well as the nature and ambit of a “works contract” which renders the same as per incuriam only in light of CIT Vs. B.R.Constructions (1993) 202 ITR 222(AP) that an adjudication not based on correct appreciation of facts does not amount to a binding precedent as under :- 38. It may be noticed that precedent ceases to be a binding precedent - (i) if it is reversed or overruled by a higher court, (ii) when it is affirmed or reversed on a different ground, ITA Nos.1576 & 1577/Hyd/2017 GPVR Engine…

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Gvpr Engineers Limited, Hyderabad

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2013-14 Gvpr Engineers Limited, The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Income Tax, Chartered Accountants, Circle 2(2), 7A, Surya Towers, Hyderabad. S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Gvpr Engineers Limited, The Deputy Commissioner C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Of Income Tax, Chartered Accountants, Circle 2(2), 7A, Surya Towers, Hyderabad. S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Gvpr Engineers Limited, Of Income Tax, C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Circle 2(2), Chartered Accountants, Hyderabad. 7A, Surya Towers, S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross Appellant) Ita Nos.1576 & 1577/Hyd/2017 Gpvr Engineers Limited Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Gvpr Engineers Limited, Of Income Tax, C/O. M. Anandam & Co., Circle 2(2), Chartered Accountants, Hyderabad. 7A, Surya Towers, S.P. Road, Secunderabad – 500003. Pan : Aaacg7614F (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross Appellant) Assessee By: Shri M.V. Anil Kumar Revenue By: Smt. D. Komali Krishna Date Of Hearing: 27/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/11/2021 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. These Two Revenue & Assessee’S Cross Appeals I.E., Ita Nos.1576 & 1617/Hyd/2017 For A.Y. 2013-14 & Ita No.1577 & 1618/Hyd/2017 For A.Y. 2014-15 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Hyderabad’S Separate Orders Dt.30.06.2017 & 29.06.2017, Passed In Case Nos.0075 & 0436/2016-17, Respectively, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Act.

…ssment years, we find that the said bench(es) nowhere discuss the clinching operation of the following “Explanation” as well as the nature and ambit of a “works contract” which renders the same as per incuriam only in light of CIT Vs. B.R.Constructions (1993) 202 ITR 222(AP) that an adjudication not based on correct appreciation of facts does not amount to a binding precedent as under :- 38. It may be noticed that precedent ceases to be a binding precedent - (i) if it is reversed or overruled by a higher court, (ii) when it is affirmed or reversed on a different ground, ITA Nos.1576 & 1577/Hyd/2017 GPVR Engine…

Ramulu Manthi, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(4), Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 595 & 596 /HYD/2019 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ramulu Manthri, Income Tax Officer, HYDERABAD Vs Ward-15(4), HYDERABAD [PAN: AKDPM3297L] (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : None For Revenue : Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR Date of Hearing : 26-10-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 16-11-2021 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeals for AY 2013-14 & 2014-15 arise from the CIT(A)-7, Hyderabad’s order dat…

Ramulu Manthi, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(4), Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 595 & 596 /HYD/2019 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ramulu Manthri, Income Tax Officer, HYDERABAD Vs Ward-15(4), HYDERABAD [PAN: AKDPM3297L] (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : None For Revenue : Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR Date of Hearing : 26-10-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 16-11-2021 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeals for AY 2013-14 & 2014-15 arise from the CIT(A)-7, Hyderabad’s order dat…

Vithaldas and Company, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1, Hyderabad

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

…e fact also remains that such an estimation depends on facts of each and every case than involving any legal interpretation which could be treated as a valid precedent as per the hon'ble jurisdictional high court’s decision in CIT Vs. B.R.Constructions (1993) 202 ITR 222 (AP). Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate in larger interest of justice that the impugned bogus purchases in all these three year(s) deserve to be restricted to disallowance @8% only in the given facts and circumstances with a rider that the same shall not be taken as a precedent in any other case. Necessary computation shall follow…

Pattabi Reddy Barankabavi, Secunderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(1), Hyderabad

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

…in retail sale on liquor does not exceed 2 to 4% in normal course as per various judicial pronouncements. The same is found to be without any merit as such an estimation could not be treated as a binding precedent in light of CIT vs. B.R. Constructions (1993) 202 ITR 222 (AP) since not considering all the relevant facts in light of the state excise law/policy defining retail margins. 3. This assessee’s appeal is dismissed. Pronounced in Open Court on 08th October, 2021. (L.P. SAHU) (S.S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: the 08th October, 2021. * gmv Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. Mr. Pattab…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad vs. Nava Bharat Ventures Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the questions referred to us are answered accordingly”

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

…nsider the legislature scheme in Chapter-X (supra). And that deviates therefrom would not only violates the same but also would amounts to non-compliance of “between persons” in Section 92F. 9. Hon'ble jurisdictional high court’s full bench decision in (1993) 202 ITR 333 (AP) CIT Vs. B.R.Constructions also holds that a judicial precedent ceases to be binding in the following conditions: “37. The effect of binding precedents in India is that the decisions of the Supreme Court are binding on all the courts. Indeed, article 141 of the Constitution embodies the rule of precedent. All the subordinate courts are bound…

Manjeera Projects, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

…ITA Nos 956 and others Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad (Through Video Conferencing) Before Shri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member AND Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 1554, 956/Hyd/2018, 1599/Hyd/2019 & 15/Hyd/2020 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2016-17 Manjeera Projects Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 6(1) PAN:AAOFM0872C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri K.C. Devdas Revenue by: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR Date of hearing: 26/08/2021 Date of pronouncement: 08/09/2021 ORDER Per S. S. Godara, J.…

Manjeera Projects, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

…ITA Nos 956 and others Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad (Through Video Conferencing) Before Shri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member AND Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 1554, 956/Hyd/2018, 1599/Hyd/2019 & 15/Hyd/2020 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2016-17 Manjeera Projects Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 6(1) PAN:AAOFM0872C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri K.C. Devdas Revenue by: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR Date of hearing: 26/08/2021 Date of pronouncement: 08/09/2021 ORDER Per S. S. Godara, J.…