VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-14(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS u/s. 194H in respect of commission payments made to distribution on prepaid connections. 4. When the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) passed a combined order for all the AYs under consideration and confirmed the orders of AO. :- 3 -: ITA Nos. 1913 to 1919/Hyd/2019 Vodafone Idea Ltd., Hyd. 5. Aggrieved by the order

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-14(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS u/s. 194H in respect of commission payments made to distribution on prepaid connections. 4. When the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) passed a combined order for all the AYs under consideration and confirmed the orders of AO. :- 3 -: ITA Nos. 1913 to 1919/Hyd/2019 Vodafone Idea Ltd., Hyd. 5. Aggrieved by the order

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-14(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS u/s. 194H in respect of commission payments made to distribution on prepaid connections. 4. When the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) passed a combined order for all the AYs under consideration and confirmed the orders of AO. :- 3 -: ITA Nos. 1913 to 1919/Hyd/2019 Vodafone Idea Ltd., Hyd. 5. Aggrieved by the order

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-14(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS u/s. 194H in respect of commission payments made to distribution on prepaid connections. 4. When the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) passed a combined order for all the AYs under consideration and confirmed the orders of AO. :- 3 -: ITA Nos. 1913 to 1919/Hyd/2019 Vodafone Idea Ltd., Hyd. 5. Aggrieved by the order

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-14(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals and cross objections of the assessee for the Asst Years 2002-03 and 2003-04 are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS u/s. 194H in respect of commission payments made to distribution on prepaid connections. 4. When the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) passed a combined order for all the AYs under consideration and confirmed the orders of AO. :- 3 -: ITA Nos. 1913 to 1919/Hyd/2019 Vodafone Idea Ltd., Hyd. 5. Aggrieved by the order

AP TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2017-18 A.P Tourism Development Vs. Dy. Cit Corporation Ltd, Circle 1(1) Vijayawada Hyderabad Pan:Aadca9817H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Advocate R. Mohan Kumar Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 24/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 24/05/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Ex-Parte Order Dated 13/02/2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2017-18. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An A.P State Government Corporation Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956 & Established With The Main Objective Of Developing Tourism Infrastructure In The State Of Andhra Pradesh. The Corporation Is A State Govt. Company Since 1976. It Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Loss Of Rs.9,95,84,720/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & Statutory Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Were Issued & Delivered Electronically To The Page 1 Of 6

Section under which TDS Amount of income income received is made by the deductor received 1 Rental/lease 194IB 2,27,57,627 income 2 Interest 194A 95,05,223 3 Contracts 194C 1,56,36,740 4 Profession 194J 6,16,386 Total 4,85,15,976 3. However, as per the P&L Account the above incomes

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

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

In the result, Ground Nos

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

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

In the result, Ground Nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.258 & 259/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18) M/S. S.A. Builders & Developers, Vs. Acit Hyderabad Central Circle 2(1) Pan:Acufs3331A Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.295 & 296/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18) Acit Vs. M/S. S.A. Builders & Central Circle 2(1) Developers, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acufs3331A (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 15/05/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Two Sets Of Cross Appeals Are Directed Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Learned Cit (A)-12, Hyderabad Both Dated 29/04/2022, Arising From The Assessment Framed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A Of The I.T. Act, 1961 For The A.Ys 2016-17 & Page 1 Of 56

section 153A is bad in law, the assessment has no leg to stand and the same is required to be quashed. 10. Without prejudice to above legal contention the appellant contends that following additions are liable to be deleted on merits. The learned CIT (A) erred in sustaining the above addition of Rs.1,44,86,500/- despite the undisputed fact

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

In the result, Ground Nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.258 & 259/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18) M/S. S.A. Builders & Developers, Vs. Acit Hyderabad Central Circle 2(1) Pan:Acufs3331A Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.295 & 296/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18) Acit Vs. M/S. S.A. Builders & Central Circle 2(1) Developers, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acufs3331A (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 15/05/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Two Sets Of Cross Appeals Are Directed Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Learned Cit (A)-12, Hyderabad Both Dated 29/04/2022, Arising From The Assessment Framed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A Of The I.T. Act, 1961 For The A.Ys 2016-17 & Page 1 Of 56

section 153A is bad in law, the assessment has no leg to stand and the same is required to be quashed. 10. Without prejudice to above legal contention the appellant contends that following additions are liable to be deleted on merits. The learned CIT (A) erred in sustaining the above addition of Rs.1,44,86,500/- despite the undisputed fact

SAPTAGIRI GRAMEENA BANK,CHITTOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, TIRUPATI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS has failed and hence, the AO is right in invoking the provisions of Sec.201 (1)and Sec.201(1A) of the Act.” 7. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. 8. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the CIT(A) and submitted that

SAPTAGIRI GRAMEENA BANK,CHITTOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, TIRUPATI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS has failed and hence, the AO is right in invoking the provisions of Sec.201 (1)and Sec.201(1A) of the Act.” 7. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. 8. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the CIT(A) and submitted that

SAPTAGIRI GRAMEENA BANK,CHITTOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, TIRUPATI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS has failed and hence, the AO is right in invoking the provisions of Sec.201 (1)and Sec.201(1A) of the Act.” 7. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. 8. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the CIT(A) and submitted that

SAPTAGIRI GRAMEENA BANK,CHITTOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, TIRUPATI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS has failed and hence, the AO is right in invoking the provisions of Sec.201 (1)and Sec.201(1A) of the Act.” 7. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. 8. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the CIT(A) and submitted that

RAIN CEMENTS LIMITED, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Rain Cements Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Rain Income Tax, Circle 3 (1) Cii Carbon (India) Ltd Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabcr8858F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Advocate Prathishta Singh & Advocate Deepak Chopra Revenue By: Dr.Rajendra Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 24.03.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(5) R.W.S. 260 Of The I.T. Act For The A.Y 2008-09. 2. This Appeal Was Earlier Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 18.10.2019. Subsequently Vide Ma No.15/Hyd/2020, Dated 23.3.2021, The Tribunal Recalled The Entire Order For Fresh Adjudication. Therefore, This Is A Recalled Matter.

TDS to an extent of Rs. 9,70.814/- 15. The Ld. AO erred in computing interest u/s 234B of Rs. 31,16.646/- 16. The Ld. AO erred in computing interest u/s 234C of Rs. 37,20,130/-. The Appellant craves, to consider each of the above grounds of appeal without prejudice to each other and craves leave to add, alter

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

SKANDA BUILDERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

TDS provisions\nand the question of disallowance u/sec.40(a)(ia) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”], but, failed to give any\nspecific example of any expenditure which can be subjected to\nprovisions of sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act and also the decision of\njurisdictional High Court in the case of Indwell Construction

KANIPAKAM HARI PRASAD REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

section 153C. In view of the above, the provisions of section 153C(1) are to be invoked for AY 2013 14 to 2018-19 and u/s 143(3) for AY 2019-20. As per the provisions of section 153C Where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned