FSL PROJECTS LIMITED (FORMERLY FRONTLINE SOFT LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 14(3) (TDS), HYDERABAD

In the result, subject to the above observations, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 195(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) and if it is found to be genuine, then the consequence shall be that the entire remittances that were made to M/s. IGTL Solutions (USA) would be non-taxable so far as TDS

ADP PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD, TELANGANA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD, TELANGANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations given hereinabove

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

3 ADP Private Limited (a) Not appreciating the fact that when TDS provisions are not applicable, the Appellant is not required to obtain a non-deduction certificate under section 195

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

195 are not applicable to the commission payments made to foreign agents, when the services were provided through the PE, Mr. Bhupesh of M/s. Nayship Marine Services and are taxable in India by virtue of Article 7 of "Agreement for Avoidance of Double Taxation and Prevention of Fiscal Evasion" between India and UAE.” 3 3. Facts of the case

ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERAABAD vs. DEENABABU KONDUBHATLA, HYDERABAD

Bench: Us :

TDS relating to Section 195. 3 3. During the course of assessment proceedings, the A.O. observed that the assessee had, during

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

S & P CAPITAL IQ (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

TDS on the software license payment in the nature of royalty and also charged interest of Rs. 1,67,50,047/- under section 201(1A) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by such an action of the learned Assessing Officer, assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A) and submitted that the matter is squarely covered by the decision

REASONING GLOBAL E-APPLICATIONS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2012-13 Reasoning Global E- Vs. Dy. C.I.T. Application Ltd, Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aadcr6701P Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Swapnil Deshmukh, Ca Revenue By: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 07/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/08/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.09.2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-3, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2012-13. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Providing It Enabled Electronic Commerce Services. It Filed Its Return Of Income For The A.Y 2012-13 On 30.09.2012 Declaring Loss Of Rs.9,52,71,232/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Noted That The Assessee Has Debited An Amount Of Rs.1,02,18,116/- Towards Web Hosting Charges. From The Bills/Invoices Produced For The Expenditure So Claimed, The Page 1 Of 19

3 of 19 ITA No 2028 of 2017 Reasoning Global E-Application Ltd Hyderabad 6. Referring to the provisions of section 195, the provisions of DTAA between India and US, the Assessing Officer held that the TDS

BADRI HARI BABU,NELLORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed and the appeals filed by the respective assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Badri Hari Babu Vs. Ito(International 15/342, Subedarpet Taxation) Andra Pradesh Nellore Nellore-524 001

3. The CIT(A) erred in placing reliance on the amended provisions of Section 201(1) of the Act, so as to treat the assessee "as an assessee not in default", but, ignoring the fact that the said amended provision i.e., first proviso to Section 201(1) of the Act was inserted in the statute book by the Finance

BADRI HARI BABU,NELLORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed and the appeals filed by the respective assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Badri Hari Babu Vs. Ito(International 15/342, Subedarpet Taxation) Andra Pradesh Nellore Nellore-524 001

3. The CIT(A) erred in placing reliance on the amended provisions of Section 201(1) of the Act, so as to treat the assessee "as an assessee not in default", but, ignoring the fact that the said amended provision i.e., first proviso to Section 201(1) of the Act was inserted in the statute book by the Finance

INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NELLORE vs. BADRI MANJULA , NELLORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed and the appeals filed by the respective assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Badri Hari Babu Vs. Ito(International 15/342, Subedarpet Taxation) Andra Pradesh Nellore Nellore-524 001

3. The CIT(A) erred in placing reliance on the amended provisions of Section 201(1) of the Act, so as to treat the assessee "as an assessee not in default", but, ignoring the fact that the said amended provision i.e., first proviso to Section 201(1) of the Act was inserted in the statute book by the Finance

DEMI REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

3) and is added to the total income of the assessee. 14.1 On appeal, the ld.CIT(A) had decided the issue at pages 70 to 74 of the order wherein he observed as under : “The claim of the appellant that the payments have been made by the M/s. DLF group is false and completely unsubstantiated and no confirmation with- regard

MADHU KUMAR PATEL,HYDERABAD vs. ADIT,(INT. TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year:2015-16 Shri Madhu Kumar Patel Vs. A.D.I.T (Intl.Taxation)-2 Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Bvdpp3797G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 26/12/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.7.2022 Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The I.T. Act For The A.Y 2015-16. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & A Resident Of The U.K. He Filed His Return Of Income On 31.08.2015 Declaring Total Income At Rs.2,91,07,000/- As Income From Long Term Capital Gain.

section 54F(3), in our opinion, shall not apply. Further, when the entire sum of Rs.6,77,04,992/- was reversed in A.Y 2014-15, therefore, again addition of the same, under protective basis, in A.Y 2015-16, in our opinion, is also not justified. We, therefore, direct the Page 15 of 20 ITA No 395 of 2022 Madhu Kumar

TOSHIBA TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,RUDRARAM vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-81), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavआ.अपी.सं / Ita Tp No.103/Hyd/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Toshiba Transmission & Distribution Vs. Acit, Circle-8(1) Systems (India) Private Ltd. Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aaect6883F] अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Ms.Kranthi,Ar & Shri Kc Devdas, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B.Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr

3 and Ground Nos. 7,8 and 9. 7. With respect to Ground No.1, the learned counsel for the assessee has mainly contended that during the course of transfer pricing proceedings the Ld. TPO has not made any adjustment qua ground No.2-3. It is submitted by him that the Ld. DRP while hearing the objections of the assessee has observed

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1,, KHAMMAM vs. M/S SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LTD.,, KHAMMAM DIST

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3. Northern Coalfields Ltd Vs ACIT 69 SOT 637 (Jabalpur Trib) Paper Book Pages 24 to 31 8.3 The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities. 8.4 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record as well as gone through the orders of revenue authorities. At the time of hearing

THE SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LTD., KOTHJAGUDEM,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CITT, KHAMMAM RANGE, KHAMMAM, KHAMMAM

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3. Northern Coalfields Ltd Vs ACIT 69 SOT 637 (Jabalpur Trib) Paper Book Pages 24 to 31 8.3 The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities. 8.4 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record as well as gone through the orders of revenue authorities. At the time of hearing

SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, KHAMMAM

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3. Northern Coalfields Ltd Vs ACIT 69 SOT 637 (Jabalpur Trib) Paper Book Pages 24 to 31 8.3 The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities. 8.4 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record as well as gone through the orders of revenue authorities. At the time of hearing

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, KHAMMAM, KHAMMAM vs. THE SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LT.D, KOTHAGUDEM, KOTHAGUDEM

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3. Northern Coalfields Ltd Vs ACIT 69 SOT 637 (Jabalpur Trib) Paper Book Pages 24 to 31 8.3 The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities. 8.4 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record as well as gone through the orders of revenue authorities. At the time of hearing

SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, KHAMMAM

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3. Northern Coalfields Ltd Vs ACIT 69 SOT 637 (Jabalpur Trib) Paper Book Pages 24 to 31 8.3 The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities. 8.4 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record as well as gone through the orders of revenue authorities. At the time of hearing

SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, KHAMMAM

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3. Northern Coalfields Ltd Vs ACIT 69 SOT 637 (Jabalpur Trib) Paper Book Pages 24 to 31 8.3 The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities. 8.4 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record as well as gone through the orders of revenue authorities. At the time of hearing