SANGHI TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERBAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

11. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to considered that Ld. AO erred in rejecting the books of accounts without specifying any reason which is not correct and bad-in-law. 12. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding that the Ld. AO disallowing the expenses 20 percent of total expenses claimed

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

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

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

11. It is, therefore, clear that the question that is relevant to be answered on this issue is whether the donations given for compliance with the provisions under section 135 of the Companies Act, to the institutions mentioned in section 80G(2) of the Act are qualified for deduction under section 80G of the Act also. 12. Explanation

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

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

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

11. It is, therefore, clear that the question that is relevant to be answered on this issue is whether the donations given for compliance with the provisions under section 135 of the Companies Act, to the institutions mentioned in section 80G(2) of the Act are qualified for deduction under section 80G of the Act also. 12. Explanation

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

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

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

11(5) in earlier year. The learned Assessing Officer erred in concluding that the assessee was not pursuing the main object of education u/ s 2(15). The learned Assessing Officer ought to have considered that the assessee does not fall under last limb of Section 2(15), viz., any other object of general public utility, since all the education

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), HYDERABAD

TDS),\nCPC, Ghaziabad, considering the TDS/TCS statements passed orders under\nsection(s) 200A/206CB r.w.s 154 r.w.s 200A for the respective quarters,\nwherein demands under section 201(1A), 234E and 220(2) were raised, as\nunder:\nForm No.\nQuarter\nDate of Date of\nfiling of\nfiling of\nquarterly rectification\nreturn\nOrder u/s.\nby CPC\nDate of 234E 201(1A) 220(2

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(4), HYDERABAD vs. QUARK ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Ito, Ward-16(4) Vs. M/S.Quark Enterprises 1St Floor, ‘B’ Block Private Limited I.T.Towers, A.C.Guards 10Th Floor, Ramky Masab Tank Grandoise Hyderabad Ramky Towers Complex Road No.62, Gachibowli Hyderabad-500 032

Section 56(2)(viib) FMV “as may be substantiated by the company to the satisfaction of the AO, based on the value, on the date of issue of shares, of its assets, including intangible assets being goodwill, know-how, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licences, franchises, or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature.” Hence, he valued FMV of shares

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

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

11,90,000/- made under Section 69C of the Act. 31. The next issue that came up for our consideration from Ground No. 5 of the assessee’s appeal is disallowance of Rs. 2,91,31,153/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for non-deduction of TDS

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

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

11,90,000/- made under Section 69C of the Act. 31. The next issue that came up for our consideration from Ground No. 5 of the assessee’s appeal is disallowance of Rs. 2,91,31,153/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for non-deduction of TDS

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

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

11,90,000/- made under Section 69C of the Act. 31. The next issue that came up for our consideration from Ground No. 5 of the assessee’s appeal is disallowance of Rs. 2,91,31,153/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for non-deduction of TDS

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee company, being devoid and bereft of any substance, is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1236 & 1237/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2021-22 & 2022-23) Vivimed Labs Limited, Vs. Dcit, Hyderabad. Central Circle-3(4), Pan: Aaacv6060A Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 05/01/2026 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order

TDS) and remitted the same in the Government Treasury as per the extant provisions. 11. Apropos the claim of the assessee company that it was not to be held as an assessee-in-default under section 201(1) of the Act, the CIT(A) observed that as per the “first proviso” to sub-section (1A) of section

PRASANTH NANDANURU,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 5(2)(a) of the Act but not by 5(2)(b) of the Act. In respect of Article 16(1) of DTAA, learned DR submitted that such an article is not applicable to the case of the assessee, Page 4 of 11 ITA-IT No. 369/Hyd/2022 because, the assessee was exercising the employment pursuant to the contract with

BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

TDS), i.e., in the violation of the provisions of section 195(1) of the Act which attracted the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act; and (ii) and though the assessee company had during the subject year carried out international transactions with its Associated Enterprises (AEs) of Rs.23,97,35,320/-, but the AO in the course

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-14(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

sections. Accordingly, the assessee company filed the details of expenditure incurred and TDS deducted, and on the basis of the information filed by the assessee, the AO noticed Non-deduction of TDS on Auto Roaming Charges paid to other Telecom operators. Accordingly, orders u/s.201(1) & 201(IA) of the I.T. Act, 1961 were passed on by the AO, holding

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-14(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

sections. Accordingly, the assessee company filed the details of expenditure incurred and TDS deducted, and on the basis of the information filed by the assessee, the AO noticed Non-deduction of TDS on Auto Roaming Charges paid to other Telecom operators. Accordingly, orders u/s.201(1) & 201(IA) of the I.T. Act, 1961 were passed on by the AO, holding

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-14(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

sections. Accordingly, the assessee company filed the details of expenditure incurred and TDS deducted, and on the basis of the information filed by the assessee, the AO noticed Non-deduction of TDS on Auto Roaming Charges paid to other Telecom operators. Accordingly, orders u/s.201(1) & 201(IA) of the I.T. Act, 1961 were passed on by the AO, holding

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-14(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

sections. Accordingly, the assessee company filed the details of expenditure incurred and TDS deducted, and on the basis of the information filed by the assessee, the AO noticed Non-deduction of TDS on Auto Roaming Charges paid to other Telecom operators. Accordingly, orders u/s.201(1) & 201(IA) of the I.T. Act, 1961 were passed on by the AO, holding

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-14(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

sections. Accordingly, the assessee company filed the details of expenditure incurred and TDS deducted, and on the basis of the information filed by the assessee, the AO noticed Non-deduction of TDS on Auto Roaming Charges paid to other Telecom operators. Accordingly, orders u/s.201(1) & 201(IA) of the I.T. Act, 1961 were passed on by the AO, holding

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-14(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

sections. Accordingly, the assessee company filed the details of expenditure incurred and TDS deducted, and on the basis of the information filed by the assessee, the AO noticed Non-deduction of TDS on Auto Roaming Charges paid to other Telecom operators. Accordingly, orders u/s.201(1) & 201(IA) of the I.T. Act, 1961 were passed on by the AO, holding

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-14(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

sections. Accordingly, the assessee company filed the details of expenditure incurred and TDS deducted, and on the basis of the information filed by the assessee, the AO noticed Non-deduction of TDS on Auto Roaming Charges paid to other Telecom operators. Accordingly, orders u/s.201(1) & 201(IA) of the I.T. Act, 1961 were passed on by the AO, holding