TRINITY INFRAVENTURES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

196 and M/s. Taksheel Solutions Limited Vs. ACIT, ITA No. 1768/Hyd/2012. 6. Per contra, learned DR submitted that in this case, the assessee withheld the TDS to the tune of Rs. 29,35,217/- and this is a clear breach of law which requires the TDS to be deposited within stipulated time and, therefore, it is not allowable under section

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. BRAMHANI INDUSTRIES LIMITED, JAMMALAMADUGU, YSR DIST., YSR DIST.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Sri Chandra Mohan Garga.Y. 2010-11 Bramhani Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Jammalamadugu. Circle-1(3), Pan: Aadcb 1666 M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Bramhani Industries Circle-1(2), Limited, Hyderabad. Jammalamadugu. Pan: Aadcb 1666 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri Gowtham Jain Revenue By Sri K.V. Aravind, Sr. Standing Counsel For Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/01/2022 Order

TDS) reported in 196 Taxmann 445. Hence it was prayed that the delay in filing the appeal was due to reasonable cause which is beyond the control of the assessee and therefore the delay in filing the appeal may be condoned. However, the Ld. CIT (A) denied to condone the delay without appreciating the facts by stating that the assessee

BRAMHANI INDUSTRIES LIMITED, JAMMALAMADUGU,KADAPA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Sri Chandra Mohan Garga.Y. 2010-11 Bramhani Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Jammalamadugu. Circle-1(3), Pan: Aadcb 1666 M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Bramhani Industries Circle-1(2), Limited, Hyderabad. Jammalamadugu. Pan: Aadcb 1666 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri Gowtham Jain Revenue By Sri K.V. Aravind, Sr. Standing Counsel For Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/01/2022 Order

TDS) reported in 196 Taxmann 445. Hence it was prayed that the delay in filing the appeal was due to reasonable cause which is beyond the control of the assessee and therefore the delay in filing the appeal may be condoned. However, the Ld. CIT (A) denied to condone the delay without appreciating the facts by stating that the assessee

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

196 Taxmann.com 329) as well as the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Income Tax Officer vs. D.G. Housing Project Ltd reported in 29 Taxmann.com 587. Thus, the learned AR has submitted that the order of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be erroneous as he has duly applied his mind. The learned

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. HSBC ELECTRONIC DATA PROCESSING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

196 ITD 53) (Hyd.), Toyota Kirloskar Auto Parts Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.1358/Bang/2008 Dt.5.1.2012 and in the case of Dipti Garg in ITA No.633/Jp/2023 Dt.30.04.2024. Therefore the Ld. AR also contended that the provisions made for doubtful debts of Rs.11,29,70,000/- is ascertained liability and should be deducted from the computation of the book profits u/s 115JB

HRITIK EXIM,SECUNDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-10(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Hritik Exim Vs. Dcit, Circle-10(1) C/O P.Murali & Co. 5Th Floor, It Towers Chartered Accountants Ac Guards 6-3-655/2/3 Hyderabad-500 004 Somajiguda Hyderabad-500 082

196 taxmann 329 (Bom.HC) viii.CIT vs. D.S.Gopta Gowda reported in 34 tamxan 154 (Kol.HC) ix. Pravardhan Seeds Pvt.Ltd. vide ITA No.667/Hyd/2017 (ITAT.Hyd) x. Visu International Ltd. vide ITA No.394/Hyd/2017 (ITAT.Hyd) 10. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that if the AO has taken one of the possible view for the issue under consideration, then the assessment order cannot

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

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

196, held that the expenditure incurred on the issue of debentures is 22 Country Club Hospitality & Holidays Limited permissible deduction under section 37 of the I.T. Act. Similar view was expressed by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of First Leasing Company & India Limited (cited supra). 8. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case

SURESH KUMAR VOBBILISETTY,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1204/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Shri Suresh Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer Vobbilisetty, (International Taxation)-2 Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acgpv5441G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca K Hemalatha राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/03/2025 आदेश/Order

196 ITD 705. 5. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material available on record. There is no dispute that in the case of the assessee there was a TDS deducted by the Foreign Government to the extent of Rs.95,539/- which was claimed as Foreign Tax Credit in accordance with section

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-17(2), HYDERABAD vs. ZELAN PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2013-14 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Zelan Projects Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 17(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaacz2265B (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Narayana Murthy Naik Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao Date Of Hearing: 11/05/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/08/2021

196/- was paid through bank and the balance through a general entry of Rs. 18,12,56,918/-. He opined that since no TDS was deducted on the said amounts cumulating to Rs. 27,61,68,714/-, the same was disallowed. 7.1 The CIT(A) directed the AO to delete the said amount

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD vs. COASTAL PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, the C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS, Certificates issued and payment received from the contractor etc. The ADIT (Inv) had thoroughly verified and an appropriate intimation was sent by him while handing over the seized material to the assessment circle. Therefore, the primary facts were fully disclosed at the time of original assessment and the AO did not state in the satisfaction note the manner

MADAN MOHAN RAO PUVVADA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1152/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Madan Mohan Rao The Income Tax Puvvada, Hyderabad. Officer, Ward-5(1), Vs. Pin – 500 063. Hyderabad. Pan Agjpp4754H Telangana. Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 04.03.2026 आदेश/Order

196 Taxman 329 (Bombay). 9. Sipura Developers (P.) Ltd vs. Pr. CIT [2024] 168 taxmann. Com 543 ( Delhi). 10. Divya Jyothi steels Ltd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle - 12, Hyderabad [ 'A' Bench ITAT Hyderabad in ITA Nos. 1176 & 29/Hyd/2016 dated 28-03-2018. 11. CIT vs Mehrotra Brothers [2004] 270 ITR 157 (M.P). 8.1. He has further contended that the Assessing