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

natural justice. The CPC as well as the AO should have taken into account this compliance before disallowing the expense. 33.6 We further note that identical issue was recently examined by this tribunal in the case of Ariba Technologies India Pvt Ltd vs. DCIT reported in 172 taxmann.com 304. The tribunal after examination of detailed decided the issue in favour

MAA HIGHWAYS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 617/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Maa Highways Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 2(1) Pan:Aaifm0756B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/08/2024 आदेश/Order

natural justice. 9. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to verify the claim of the appellant of actual gross receipts not only from Form No 26AS but "also from other relevant documents." 10. The assessee may add, alter, or modify or substitute any other points to the grounds of appeal at any time before

14 REELS VENKATBOYANAPALLI JV,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha Gआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.617 & 969/Hyd./2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years 2018-2019 & 2017-2018 14 Reels The Dcit, Central Venkatboyanapalli Jv, Circle-1(3), Hyderabad. Vs. Hyderabad – 500 033. Pin – 500 004. Pan Aaaaz2224L Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा /Assessee By : Mrs. K Prabhabati, Advocate राज" व "ारा /Revenue By : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12.11.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao: These Two Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Learned Cit(A), Hyderabad- 11, Hyderabad, Dated 08.02.2025 & 13.03.2025 For The Assessment Years 2018-2019 & 2017-2018, Respectively.

natural justice. The ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that in response to notices issued the Appellant on couple of occasions sought adjournment and that the Id. CIT(A) without granting sufficient opportunity has dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. 2. Without prejudice to the above, the Id. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition made

SDS METALS (I) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Sds Metals (I) Private Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Limited, Hyderabad. Ward –3(1), C/O. P. Murali & Co., Hyderabad. Chartered Accountants, 6-3-655/2/3, Somajiguda, Telangana – 500082. Pan : Aascs1826P. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Krishna, C.A. Revenue By: Shri B. Yadagiri, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 07.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2024 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y. 2017-18 Arises From The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dt.18.09.2023 Invoking Proceedings Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”).

natural justice. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the initiation of penalty proceedings u/ s 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when the assessee has not under reported his income for the Assessment year under consideration.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is a company engaged in trading of iron and steel items

CORTEVA AGRISCIENCE SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G., Hon’Bleassessment Year – 2019-20 Corteva Agriscience Services Vs. Dcit Circle-1(1) India Private Limited Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan : Aacce0509M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rohit Mittal, Ld.Ar Revenue By: Shri Ashish Kumar Shukla, Ld.Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.10.2024 21.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement:

natural justice. 2 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances and in law the NFAC has erred in not allowing the claim u/s 43B of Income Of the Income tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”), 1961 made in Income Tax Return vis-à-vis not reported in Form 3CD and making an addition to the extent

NEERUS ENSEMBLES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.162 & 163/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2017-18) Neerus Ensembles Pvt. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 16(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aaccn1554D (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/06/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 12/06/2024 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M These Two Appeals Filed By Neerus Ensembles Pvt. Ltd. (“Assessee”) Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Both Dated 22/12/2023 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Relating To A.Y.2017-18. Page 1 Of 10

TDS had been deducted and paid within the due date specified by the Act. The same is required to be verified from the relevant records/documents. Therefore considering the principle of natural justice

NEERUS ENSEMBLES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.162 & 163/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2017-18) Neerus Ensembles Pvt. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 16(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aaccn1554D (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/06/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 12/06/2024 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M These Two Appeals Filed By Neerus Ensembles Pvt. Ltd. (“Assessee”) Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Both Dated 22/12/2023 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Relating To A.Y.2017-18. Page 1 Of 10

TDS had been deducted and paid within the due date specified by the Act. The same is required to be verified from the relevant records/documents. Therefore considering the principle of natural justice

ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD vs. NEW CLUB, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

natural justice by not calling for a remand report from the Ld. AO before deleting the additions. Therefore, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was contended to be contrary to law and liable to be set aside. 6. Per contra, the Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that the assessee is a club generating revenue through various activities such

ACIT, CC-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. LEPL PROJECTS LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

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

TDS deducted from M/s. MEIL on payments to the appellant, form 16A, segment wise allocation of total expenditure of Rs.486.76 crores, ledger account of the appellant in the books of M/s. MEIL, ledger account of M/s. MEIL in books of the appellant and bank account statements as additional evidence, which were forwarded to the Assessing Officer who sent the remand

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PVT. LTD., BANGALORE

TDS provisions and the question of disallowance u/sec.40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”], but, failed to give any specific example of any expenditure which can be subjected to provisions of sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act and also the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Indwell Construction

SIVA SANKARA REDDY TUNGA,HYDERABAD. vs. ITO., WARD - 14(1), HYDERABAD.

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

Bench: Us:

natural justice and denying a fair opportunity of being heard. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any or more grounds of appeal stated herein above either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal.” 2. The assessee, vide his petition/letter filed before us, had submitted that as the “ground of appeal

SKANDA BUILDERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), HYDERABAD

TDS provisions\nand the question of disallowance u/sec.40(a)(ia) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”], but, failed to give any\nspecific example of any expenditure which can be subjected to\nprovisions of sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act and also the decision of\njurisdictional High Court in the case of Indwell Construction

NAFEES SULTANA,HYEDERABAD. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD.

Bench: Us:

natural justice. 4.a) That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,10,56,130/- received from HY Media and Entertainment Pvt Ltd. as unexplained rental income, without appreciating that the amount was received pursuant to a compromise agreement in a civil case (O.S. No. 881 of 2012), and pertains to arrears

POWER MECH INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED ,VIJAYAWADA vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

TDS.\nHowever, details of the manpower supplied such as names of the persons,\nidentity, address, etc. were not furnished by the appellant. In absence of such\ndetails being furnished by the appellant, AO issued notice u/s 133(6) to RSIEL\nfor furnishing details of manpower supplied to the appellant such as, names of\nthe persons, identity, address, etc. The physical

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2), HYDERABAD vs. AMR INDIA LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, Cross Objection No

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

natural justice and additions made on the basis of third party statement cannot be sustained. This principle is further supported by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishanchand Chellaram vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) where similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The sum and substance of the ratio laid

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2), HYDERABAD vs. AMR INDIA LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, Cross Objection No

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

natural justice and additions made on the basis of third party statement cannot be sustained. This principle is further supported by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishanchand Chellaram vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) where similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The sum and substance of the ratio laid

SBPL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.685/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Sbpl Infrastructure Vs. Deputy Commissioner Limited Of Income Tax Hyderabad Circle-3(1) [Pan : Aaccs9014M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Sashank Dundu, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri M.Vijay Kumar,Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 16/12/2024 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Learned Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 13.02.2024 & Pertains To A.Y.2014-15. 2. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Time Barred By 94 Days. The Assessee Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay & Submitted That Shri Manoj Sharma, Chief Financial Officer Of The Appellant Company, Who Was Entrusted With The Job Of Looking

Natural Justice. 6. The NFAC erred in confirming the disallowance made by the AO u/s 14A of the Income-tax Act to the tune of Rs. 2,30,96,970/- without appreciating the fact that there was no exemption claimed by the appellant for the Dividend income i.e. Rs. 41,40,035/- which has been declared in the return

VENKATA SUDHAKAR SIMHADRI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Accounant Member आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.382/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14) Shri Venkata Sudhakar Dcit, Circle 2(1), Vs. Hyderabad. Simhadri, Hyderabad. Pan : Avnps0649D (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Y. V. Bhanu Narayan Rao, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/06/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 19/06/2024

natural justice. 10. For these and other reasons which may be adduced at the time of hearing, it is therefore prayed that the additions made by the learned A.O. which were confirmed by the learned CIT (Appeals) in the ex-parte orders passed for the A.Y. 2013-14 may kindly be deleted. 11. The appellant craves leave to add/alter