KRISHNA CONSTRUCTIONS,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.No.1330/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Krishna Constructions The Income Tax Officer, Nirmal. Telangana. Ward-1, Vs. Pin – 504 106. Nirmal – 504 106. Pan Aapfk1280K Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By : Sri D Prabhakar Reddy, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Dr. Sachin Kumar,Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 08.04.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

TDS claimed are reflecting in the Form 26AS of not, whether the assessee had actually paid any excess advance tax or not & the reasons for claiming the refund. In the present case, the AO completed the assessment on the sole presumption that that the assessee has made artificial arrangements to generate the capital loss and accordingly the claim of capital

COUNTRY CLUB HOSPITALITY & HOLIDAYS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

119 Taxman 235 (Cal.) 4. CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd., (2007) 164 Taxman 249 (Mad.) 5. CIT vs. First Leasing Co. of India Ltd., (2008) 304 ITR 67 (Mad.) 6. CIT vs. Secure Meters Ltd., 321 ITR 611 7. CIT vs. ITC Hotels Ltd., 334 ITR 109 8. M/s. Crane Software International Ltd. vs. DCIT, Bangalore Order dated

VICTORY ELECTRICALS LIMITED, MEDCHAL,R.R.DIST vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-17(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Victory Electricals Ltd., V Dcit,Circle-17(2) Plot No.8, Survey No.855, S. Signature Towers Ida, Medchal, Kondapur Ranga Reddy, Hyderabad Hyderabad-501 401

TDS is to be effected amounted to Rs.65,65,157/_ and whereas the appellant disallowed only Rs.37,9 1,602/ ". The balance is disallowed by the Assessing Officer now. In this regard, the appellant submits that to the extent the amount was paid no disallowance can be made and, therefore,. the appellant disallowed only Rs.37

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

2,81,87,800/- towards unexplained cash receipts. 60. Since the facts and issue are identical to that of the Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2004-05, the same decision holds good. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merits. Appeal No.619/H/2014 (AY: 2006-07): (Assessee’s appeal) 61. Ground No.(i):- Addition made

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

2,81,87,800/- towards unexplained cash receipts. 60. Since the facts and issue are identical to that of the Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2004-05, the same decision holds good. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merits. Appeal No.619/H/2014 (AY: 2006-07): (Assessee’s appeal) 61. Ground No.(i):- Addition made

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

2,81,87,800/- towards unexplained cash receipts. 60. Since the facts and issue are identical to that of the Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2004-05, the same decision holds good. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merits. Appeal No.619/H/2014 (AY: 2006-07): (Assessee’s appeal) 61. Ground No.(i):- Addition made

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

2,81,87,800/- towards unexplained cash receipts. 60. Since the facts and issue are identical to that of the Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2004-05, the same decision holds good. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merits. Appeal No.619/H/2014 (AY: 2006-07): (Assessee’s appeal) 61. Ground No.(i):- Addition made

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

2,81,87,800/- towards unexplained cash receipts. 60. Since the facts and issue are identical to that of the Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2004-05, the same decision holds good. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merits. Appeal No.619/H/2014 (AY: 2006-07): (Assessee’s appeal) 61. Ground No.(i):- Addition made

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

2,81,87,800/- towards unexplained cash receipts. 60. Since the facts and issue are identical to that of the Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2004-05, the same decision holds good. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merits. Appeal No.619/H/2014 (AY: 2006-07): (Assessee’s appeal) 61. Ground No.(i):- Addition made

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

2,81,87,800/- towards unexplained cash receipts. 60. Since the facts and issue are identical to that of the Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2004-05, the same decision holds good. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merits. Appeal No.619/H/2014 (AY: 2006-07): (Assessee’s appeal) 61. Ground No.(i):- Addition made

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

2,81,87,800/- towards unexplained cash receipts. 60. Since the facts and issue are identical to that of the Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2004-05, the same decision holds good. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merits. Appeal No.619/H/2014 (AY: 2006-07): (Assessee’s appeal) 61. Ground No.(i):- Addition made

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

2,81,87,800/- towards unexplained cash receipts. 60. Since the facts and issue are identical to that of the Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2004-05, the same decision holds good. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merits. Appeal No.619/H/2014 (AY: 2006-07): (Assessee’s appeal) 61. Ground No.(i):- Addition made

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

2,81,87,800/- towards unexplained cash receipts. 60. Since the facts and issue are identical to that of the Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2004-05, the same decision holds good. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merits. Appeal No.619/H/2014 (AY: 2006-07): (Assessee’s appeal) 61. Ground No.(i):- Addition made

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

2,81,87,800/- towards unexplained cash receipts. 60. Since the facts and issue are identical to that of the Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2004-05, the same decision holds good. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merits. Appeal No.619/H/2014 (AY: 2006-07): (Assessee’s appeal) 61. Ground No.(i):- Addition made

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

2,81,87,800/- towards unexplained cash receipts. 60. Since the facts and issue are identical to that of the Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2004-05, the same decision holds good. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merits. Appeal No.619/H/2014 (AY: 2006-07): (Assessee’s appeal) 61. Ground No.(i):- Addition made

DY.CIT, CIR-1(2), HYDERABAD vs. M/S CUNTRY CLUB (I) LIMITED,, HYDERABAD

In the result, the grounds of the appeal of the assessee on this issue are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Country Club Vs. Asst. Cit, Circle-1(2), Hospitality & Holidays Ltd., Hyderabad. (Formerly Known As Country Club India Ltd.,) Hyderabad.

TDS has been made. Therefore, the decision of the CIT (A) on this point has to be set aside. In such circumstances, the alternate plea of the assessee assumes importance. 10. The learned Counsel for the assessee has placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage

M/S. COUNTRY CLUB INDIA LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the grounds of the appeal of the assessee on this issue are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Country Club Vs. Asst. Cit, Circle-1(2), Hospitality & Holidays Ltd., Hyderabad. (Formerly Known As Country Club India Ltd.,) Hyderabad.

TDS has been made. Therefore, the decision of the CIT (A) on this point has to be set aside. In such circumstances, the alternate plea of the assessee assumes importance. 10. The learned Counsel for the assessee has placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. TRIDENT CHEMPHAR LIMITED, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Trident Chemphar Ltd. Hyderabad. Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pan : Aaeft8416H. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri B.G. Reddy Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.01.2023

Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. The jurisdictional ITAT, Hyderabad in M/s.Vimta Labs Ltd, Hyderabad vs DCIT, Circle-7(2), Hyderabad (ITA Nos.11, 12 & 1273/2017) dated 24/04/2019 has discussed this issue elaborately and held that the business receipts of foreign residents are not taxable in India since the agents have no PE in India and therefore are not required

SHASHIKALA RAM KUMAR ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

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

TDS in respect of interest and financial charges, and Rs. 2,62,06,238/- under section 40A(3) of the Act for making cash payments in excess of Rs. 20,000/- in contravention of the provisions of law. 3. In appeal, assessee produced certificates relevant under proviso to section 201(1) of the Act to the tune