LYCOS INTERNET LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

14A is called for when the assessee has not earned any dividend income during the year under consideration. Accordingly, in view of the facts as discussed above, we do not find any error or illegality in the impugned order of the learned CIT (A) qua on this issue. The same is upheld.\n\n10.\nWith regard to grounds of appeal

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

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

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

INVESCO(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2 (1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

TDS credit and advance tax credit of the amalgamating entity to the Appellant (i.e. amalgamated company) of the AY 2017-18 at the time of determining the amount of tax payable by the Appellant. 10. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in levying interest under section

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

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

TDS on payments made to sub-contractors in terms of Section 194C of the Act. Filing of return of income by the sub-contractors is not within the domain of the assessee and beyond the control of the assessee. Therefore, non-furnishing of return of income by the sub-contractors is not a ground for disbelieving or doubting the genuineness

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

KAUSALYA AGRO FORMS & DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD 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.676/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

KAUSALYA AGRO FORMS & DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD 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.676/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

NALGONDA REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

14A of the Act but confirmed addition towards cash deposits during the demonetization period. 29. The assessee preferred a further appeal before the Tribunal. The ITAT, Hyderabad Bench vide its common order in ITA No.657/Hyd/2020 dated 21-03-2022, set aside the issue to the file of the AO for fresh examination. The assessee filed an appeal before

NALGONDA REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED ,SECUNDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

14A of the Act but confirmed addition towards cash deposits during the demonetization period. 29. The assessee preferred a further appeal before the Tribunal. The ITAT, Hyderabad Bench vide its common order in ITA No.657/Hyd/2020 dated 21-03-2022, set aside the issue to the file of the AO for fresh examination. The assessee filed an appeal before

NALGONDA REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

14A of the Act but confirmed addition towards cash deposits during the demonetization period. 29. The assessee preferred a further appeal before the Tribunal. The ITAT, Hyderabad Bench vide its common order in ITA No.657/Hyd/2020 dated 21-03-2022, set aside the issue to the file of the AO for fresh examination. The assessee filed an appeal before

INDUR AVENUES AND FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,NIZAMABAD 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.1,31,51,977/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before