DR. REDDYS, LABORATORIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.490 & 491/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Dr. Reddy’S Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad. The Acit, Vs. Pin – 500 034. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – Telangana. 500 084. Pan Aaacd7999Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Padamchand Khincha राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

TDS, without appreciating fact that, the payments are not taxable in India under the provisions of respective tax treaties. 7.2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO/DRP erred in not appreciating the fact that, by applying most favoured nation clause as contained in India Netherlands tax treaty and by accessing India-Finland

DR. REDDYS, LABORATORIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.490 & 491/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Dr. Reddy’S Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad. The Acit, Vs. Pin – 500 034. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – Telangana. 500 084. Pan Aaacd7999Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Padamchand Khincha राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

TDS, without appreciating fact that, the payments are not taxable in India under the provisions of respective tax treaties. 7.2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO/DRP erred in not appreciating the fact that, by applying most favoured nation clause as contained in India Netherlands tax treaty and by accessing India-Finland

SHAKTI HORMANN PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.917/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2020-21) Shakti Hormann Private Limited, Hyderabad. Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad. Pan: Aadcs4024Q (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 15/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of 19/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Company Is Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “A.O.”) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”) Dated 25/07/2024 For The

TDS related disallowances; and (vii) prior year adjustments. After necessary verifications, the AO accepted the assessee's explanation on the issues other than the TP adjustment that was suggested by the TPO. 6. The AO thereafter issued a draft assessment order under section 144C(1) of the Act, dated 26/09/2023, wherein, after incorporating the TP adjustments, he proposed to assess

EPAM SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -8 (1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.83 & 498/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Epam Systems India The Dcit & The Acit, Private Limited, Vs. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – 500 081 Hyderabad. Pan Aaacw2012R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Shreyas Sardesai राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

TDS on ESOP is an international transaction with its AE which was not at arm's length. 4:2 The Appellant submits that considering the facts and circumstances of its case and the law prevailing on the subject the international transactions relating to recovery of expenses were at arm's length and hence no adjustment in respect thereof was called

EPAM SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.83 & 498/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Epam Systems India The Dcit & The Acit, Private Limited, Vs. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – 500 081 Hyderabad. Pan Aaacw2012R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Shreyas Sardesai राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

TDS on ESOP is an international transaction with its AE which was not at arm's length. 4:2 The Appellant submits that considering the facts and circumstances of its case and the law prevailing on the subject the international transactions relating to recovery of expenses were at arm's length and hence no adjustment in respect thereof was called

SHASHIKALA RAM KUMAR ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

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

TDS in respect of interest and financial charges, and Rs. 2,62,06,238/- under section 40A(3) of the Act for making cash payments in excess of Rs. 20,000/- in contravention of the provisions of law. 3. In appeal, assessee produced certificates relevant under proviso to section 201(1) of the Act to the tune

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

Section 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was conducted at the business premises of the assessee. The assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2008-09 on 07.07.2009 declaring an income of Rs.2,01,42,190/-. Thereafter, notice u/s. 143(2) was issued and served on the appellant firm. Subsequently, Assessing Officer [completed the assessment

IDEA CELLULAR LTD, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, TDS CIRCLE, WARD-1(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals under consideration are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

226)(SC); b. Bharti Cellular Limited vs. ACIT (200 Taxman 254) (Cal) c. Vodafone Essar Limited vs. Dy. CIT (45 SOT 82) (T Mum) 3. In this regards, the Assessee submits that where the basic information of taxes paid by the recipient is provided by the Assessee, then the onus, to examine the facts and confirm whether

IDEA CELLULAR LTD, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, TDS CIRCLE, WARD-1(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals under consideration are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

226)(SC); b. Bharti Cellular Limited vs. ACIT (200 Taxman 254) (Cal) c. Vodafone Essar Limited vs. Dy. CIT (45 SOT 82) (T Mum) 3. In this regards, the Assessee submits that where the basic information of taxes paid by the recipient is provided by the Assessee, then the onus, to examine the facts and confirm whether

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

226 has held that liability to pay interest u/s. 201(1A) till the date of payment of tax by deductee assessee remains unaltered. Accordingly, the AO also levied the interest u/s. 201(1A) of the I.T.Act. 4. Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee made elaborate submissions based on which the ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report from

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

226 has held that liability to pay interest u/s. 201(1A) till the date of payment of tax by deductee assessee remains unaltered. Accordingly, the AO also levied the interest u/s. 201(1A) of the I.T.Act. 4. Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee made elaborate submissions based on which the ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report from

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

226 has held that liability to pay interest u/s. 201(1A) till the date of payment of tax by deductee assessee remains unaltered. Accordingly, the AO also levied the interest u/s. 201(1A) of the I.T.Act. 4. Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee made elaborate submissions based on which the ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report from

SURYA PRABHA SUNKAVALLI,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) was complete by order dated 30/12/2016 at Rs. 51,86,226/- by making an addition of Rs. 40,30,297/- under section 68 of the Act and a sum of Rs. 77,809/- by making disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for not deducting TDS

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

226/- on account of late payment of the employee’s contribution as per the provisions of Act. It is pertinent to mention that the same issue involved in this judgement, so may please be followed in the present case for the sake of judicial consistency.” 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant, M/s. Megha Engineering

ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), TIRUPATI vs. MAKAM RADHAKRISHNA RAMMOHAN, MADANAPALLE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes and the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

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

226/- on account of difference in valuation of silver jewelry stock, Rs. 1,86,28,731/- on account of difference in valuation of diamond jewelry stock, Rs. 30,68,286/- on account of bogus making charges expenses, Rs. 5,74,843/- on account of non-deduction of TDS on bonus paid under section

CHELIKAMMUNICATIONS,TIRUPATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), TIRUPATI., TIRUPATI

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section 194J of the Act. However, the assessee deposited an amount of Rs.68,377/- only into the credit of the central government, out of TDS of Rs.22,37,265/-. Therefore, the Ld. AO treated the balance amount on which TDS has been made but not remitted to ITA No.487/Hyd/2023 3 the credit of the central government to the extent

SIBY MINING AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. T. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS RANGE-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri Rifaur Rahman

section 271C of the Act is a penal provision introduced to deter the assessees from non-deduction of tax at source. JCIT (TDS) also referred Circular issued by the CBDT as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Hindustan Coco Cola Beverages (293 ITR 226) to highlight that the Hon’ble Apex

SIBY MINING AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS RANGE-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri Rifaur Rahman

section 271C of the Act is a penal provision introduced to deter the assessees from non-deduction of tax at source. JCIT (TDS) also referred Circular issued by the CBDT as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Hindustan Coco Cola Beverages (293 ITR 226) to highlight that the Hon’ble Apex