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

section 36(1)(vii) of the Act, Our attention was drawn to reply given by the assessee, more particularly at page No.53 & 54 to the following effect “In continuation of the statement of facts, the appellant may be permitted to submit the following explanation: There are three effective grounds in all. The first ground is with regard to disallowance

BRIGHTCOM GROUP LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

14A of the Act is warranted. Therefore, the disallowance of Rs.2,00,990/- made by the Ld. AO is directed to be deleted. Accordingly, the ground no. 7 of the assessee is allowed. 16. Ground No. 8 raised by the assessee relates to the disallowance of Rs.18,72,836/- made by the Ld. AO on account of CSR expenditure

KASUSALYA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

TDS has been deducted on the said interest. Accordingly, the AO disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.67,85,773/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before

KASUSALYA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

TDS has been deducted on the said interest. Accordingly, the AO disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.67,85,773/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before

KASUSALYA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

TDS has been deducted on the said interest. Accordingly, the AO disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.67,85,773/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before

KASUSALYA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

TDS has been deducted on the said interest. Accordingly, the AO disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.67,85,773/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before

KASUSALYA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

TDS has been deducted on the said interest. Accordingly, the AO disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.67,85,773/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. MEGHA ENGINEERING AND INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Ble & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Hon’Bleassessment Year – 2020-21 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S.Megha Engineering & Infrastructure Ltd. Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaecm7627A

14A are clear and unambiguous that what is not allowable is "expenditure incurred" for EARNING EXEMPT INCOME and, therefore, such disallowance cannot be restricted to EXEMPT INCOME EARNED.” 3 2.1. The additional ground filed by the Revenue reads as under : “The above issue is fully covered in revenue’s favour by recent Hon'ble Apex Court decision in the case

NEOVANTAGE INNOVATION PARK PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 16(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section 14A of the Act i.e. present ground no.8 of the assessee. Although the Revenue had also raised a ground relating to the benchmarking of interest paid on NCDs, the same was not admitted by the Hon’ble High Court. There was no appeal filed by the assessee on this issue before the Hon'ble High Court. Consequently, the issue

NEOVANTAGE BIO-TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE 5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section 14A of the Act i.e. present ground no.8 of the assessee. Although the Revenue had also raised a ground relating to the benchmarking of interest paid on NCDs, the same was not admitted by the Hon’ble High Court. There was no appeal filed by the assessee on this issue before the Hon'ble High Court. Consequently, the issue

ATHENA GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the ground nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section 194A, no TDS is required to be deducted on the amount of payment of interest to bank. Therefore, in our considered opinion, as no TDS was required to be deducted on interest to ITA No.895 896 and 18 1266/Hyd/2018 bank, the addition made by the Ld. AO on account of no TDS is required to be deleted. Accordingly

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), HYDERABAD vs. ATHENA GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED (FORMERLY M/S VJIL CONSULTING LIMITED), HYDERABAD

In the result, the ground nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section 194A, no TDS is required to be deducted on the amount of payment of interest to bank. Therefore, in our considered opinion, as no TDS was required to be deducted on interest to ITA No.895 896 and 18 1266/Hyd/2018 bank, the addition made by the Ld. AO on account of no TDS is required to be deleted. Accordingly

XILINX INDIA TECHNOLOGY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the ground nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section 194A, no TDS is required to be deducted on the amount of payment of interest to bank. Therefore, in our considered opinion, as no TDS was required to be deducted on interest to ITA No.895 896 and 18 1266/Hyd/2018 bank, the addition made by the Ld. AO on account of no TDS is required to be deleted. Accordingly

AGARWAL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 14A cannot be made. 10. In light of the above, it is settled that in case the assessee is having own funds and interest-free funds available, no addition can be made in the hands of the assessee. However, in the present case, the availability of own funds and free interest funds were disputed by the Assessing Officer/CIT

KASUSALYA SHELTERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

14A of the Act. 16. The assessee preferred a further appeal before the ITAT, and the ITAT, vide its common order in ITA No.680/Hyd/2020 dated 21- 03-2022, set aside the issue to the file of AO for verification. The assessee filed an appeal before the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana against the common order passed by the Tribunal

KASUSALYA SHELTERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

14A of the Act. 16. The assessee preferred a further appeal before the ITAT, and the ITAT, vide its common order in ITA No.680/Hyd/2020 dated 21- 03-2022, set aside the issue to the file of AO for verification. The assessee filed an appeal before the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana against the common order passed by the Tribunal

HARSHINI EPC PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

14A of the Act and thereby determined the total taxable income at Rs.1,14,59,752/-. 4. Feeling aggrieved with the order passed by the assessing officer, assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC who granted partial relief to the assessee. 5. Aggrieved with the order of ld.CIT(A), assessee is now in appeal before us. GROUND NO.1

HARSHINI EPC PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

14A of the Act r.w Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962. 3. The ld.CIT(A) having allowed additional ground nos. 15 to 19 taken before him, erred in directing the Assessing Officer to verify the reconciliation statements and to give credit to TDS on satisfying with the conditions as contained in Section