DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

132 of the Act. To this extent we reverse the findings\nof the learned CIT(A) for these A.Ys.2014-2015, 2015-2016\nand 2016-2017.\n8.3.\nHaving said so, let us come to the issue on hand.\nThe assessee has claimed deduction u/sec.80IA(4) of the Act\nin respect of profit derived from development of\ninfrastructure projects. There

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

132 of the Act. To this extent we reverse the findings\nof the learned CIT(A) for these A.Ys.2014-2015, 2015-2016\nand 2016-2017.\n8.3.\nHaving said so, let us come to the issue on hand.\nThe assessee has claimed deduction u/sec.80IA(4) of the Act\nin respect of profit derived from development of\ninfrastructure projects. There

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for the\nA

section 148 of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961\nImproper many\nis covered w/1149(1)(b).\nIsame of motive of/5148\nis ayyun.\nDate: 6/10/23\n(SANJAY BAHADUR, IRS)\nDirector General of Income Tax (Inv).\nHyderabad.\n5.\nThus, it is clear that an identical sanction was granted\nby the DGIT (Inv), Hyderabad for all the A.Ys.\n6.\nAt the outset, we note

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,K.V.RANGAREDDY vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for the\nA

section 132 of the income tax Act 1961 /\n37Aof the W. T.Act 1957 in the case of (A) above to search the place mentioned at (B) above\nand duly signed and sealed by the Pr. Director of Income tax (Inv.), Hyderabad to Sri\nRamesh Kumar Sanaka who was present in the said place at the time and who after\nreading

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for the\nA

section 132 of the income tax Act 1961 /\n37Aof the W. T.Act 1957 in the case of (A) above to search the place mentioned at (B) above\nand duly signed and sealed by the Pr. Director of Income tax (Inv.), Hyderabad to Sri\nRamesh Kumar Sanaka who was present in the said place at the time and who after\nreading

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT.,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for the\nA

section 132 of the income tax Act 1961 /\n37Aof the W. T.Act 1957 in the case of (A) above to search the place mentioned at (B) above\nand duly signed and sealed by the Pr. Director of Income tax (Inv.), Hyderabad to Sri\nRamesh Kumar Sanaka who was present in the said place at the time and who after\nreading

ACE TYRES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

Section 132 of the Income tax Act 1961 /\n37Aof the W. T.Act 1957 in the case of (A) above to search the place mentioned at (B) above\nand duly signed and sealed by the Pr. Director of Income tax (Inv.), Hyderabad to Sri\nRamesh Kumar Sanaka who was present in the said place at the time and who after\nreading

ACE TYRES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

section 149(1) of the\nAct, as existed at the relevant point of time and submitted that\nthe asset which include immovable property being land or\nbuilding or both, shares and securities, loans & advances,\ndeposits in the bank account. In support of his contention he has\nrelied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case

S A BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS ,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2) , HYDERABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

1) Room No.612, 6th Floor, Aayakar\nBhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad 500004\n3\nPr. CIT – Cesntral, Hyderabad\n4\nDR, ITAT Hyderabad Benches\n5\nGuard File\nBy Order", "summary": { "facts": "These appeals concern two sets of cross appeals against orders related to assessment framed under Section 153A. The assessee and Revenue raised grounds of appeal concerning the validity of search proceedings, additions

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1) , HYDERABAD vs. S A BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS , HYDERABAD

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

section 153A is bad in law, the\nassessment has no leg to stand and the same is required to be\nquashed.\n10. Without prejudice to above legal contention the appellant\ncontends that following additions are liable to be deleted on\nmerits.\n(i)\nCreditors Appearing under Loans &\nAdvances (Asset)\nRs.1,44,86,500\nSl.No.\nName of the Customer\nClosing Balance

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. TRACKS & TOWERS INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED(PART IX), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

132. The fresh claim so made was rejected by the AO and upheld by the ld.CIT(A). On further appeal, the Tribunal, following the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jaya Steel (supra) held that the assessment or reassessment made in pursuance to section 153A of the Act is not a denovo assessment and therefore

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. TRACKS & TOWERS INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED(PART IX), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

132. The fresh claim so made was rejected by the AO and upheld by the ld.CIT(A). On further appeal, the Tribunal, following the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jaya Steel (supra) held that the assessment or reassessment made in pursuance to section 153A of the Act is not a denovo assessment and therefore

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

TDS in their assessments on the basis entries in Form No.26AS. The most relevant provision is Section 114 of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which stipulates that the Court may presume that Judicial and official acts have been regularly performed. No evidence was found to show that cash was returned by these entities to Appellant. Mere oral statements

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

TDS in their assessments on the basis entries in Form No.26AS. The most relevant provision is Section 114 of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which stipulates that the Court may presume that Judicial and official acts have been regularly performed. No evidence was found to show that cash was returned by these entities to Appellant. Mere oral statements

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

TDS in their assessments on the basis entries in Form No.26AS. The most relevant provision is Section 114 of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which stipulates that the Court may presume that Judicial and official acts have been regularly performed. No evidence was found to show that cash was returned by these entities to Appellant. Mere oral statements

ORBIT VENTURES,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 6,56,720/- Tax paid u/s 140A Regular Tax Paid 0 6,56,720/- TOTAL TAXES PAID = 0 Refund Issued U/s 143(1)/143(3)/154/etc 2,00,81,620/- = Balance tax payable Round off ITA Nos.34 to 36/Hyd/2021 9. Feeling aggrieved with the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before ld.CIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 6,56,720/- Tax paid u/s 140A Regular Tax Paid 0 6,56,720/- TOTAL TAXES PAID = 0 Refund Issued U/s 143(1)/143(3)/154/etc 2,00,81,620/- = Balance tax payable Round off ITA Nos.34 to 36/Hyd/2021 9. Feeling aggrieved with the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before ld.CIT

ORBIT VENTURES,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 6,56,720/- Tax paid u/s 140A Regular Tax Paid 0 6,56,720/- TOTAL TAXES PAID = 0 Refund Issued U/s 143(1)/143(3)/154/etc 2,00,81,620/- = Balance tax payable Round off ITA Nos.34 to 36/Hyd/2021 9. Feeling aggrieved with the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before ld.CIT