ORBIS REAL ESTATE FUND I,HYDERABAD (AUTH. REP.) vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 - 2, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section 234B and 234C despite the TDS Amount being sufficient to cover the entire tax liability computed as per contested

DCIT., (INTERNATION TAXATION)-2, HYDERABAD vs. VIRTUSA INTERNATIONAL B V, NETHERLAND

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

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

TDS has been made by the payee company without appreciating the fact that the interest u/s.234C is governed by the provisions of Sec.234C which speaks about charging of interest u/s.234C when the assessee has not paid the whole amount of tax payable in respect of the subject dividend income by the end of the financial year i.e 31.03.2023. ITA No.727/Hyd/2024

GAINSIGHT SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERSABAD

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)

234B / 234C On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in levying interest under section 234B/234C of the Act. 11. Penalty Proceedings On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. TPO / Ld. AO / Ld. DRP have erred in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 270A and 271AA, without

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)

TDS Credit of the transferor company to successor or transferee company even though the income of the transferor company is already considered by the successor company. 18.3 The Ld. AO erred in law and facts by not granting any TCS credit vis-à-vis INR 1,29,734/- as claimed by the Appellant in its Return of Income

K & R RAIL ENGINEERING LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS credits, Advance Tax and Self Assessment Tax available in Form 26AS of KVR Rail Infra Projects Pvt Ltd should have been allowed to the assessee company. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) not appreciating the fact that the AO has inappropriately applied the provisions of section 234A, 234B

K & R RAIL ENGINEERING LIMITED,SECUNDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS credits, Advance Tax and Self Assessment Tax available in Form 26AS of KVR Rail Infra Projects Pvt Ltd should have been allowed to the assessee company. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) not appreciating the fact that the AO has inappropriately applied the provisions of section 234A, 234B

K & R RAIL ENGINEERING LIMITED,SECUNDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS credits, Advance Tax and Self Assessment Tax available in Form 26AS of KVR Rail Infra Projects Pvt Ltd should have been allowed to the assessee company. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) not appreciating the fact that the AO has inappropriately applied the provisions of section 234A, 234B

K & R RAIL ENGINEERING LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS credits, Advance Tax and Self Assessment Tax available in Form 26AS of KVR Rail Infra Projects Pvt Ltd should have been allowed to the assessee company. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) not appreciating the fact that the AO has inappropriately applied the provisions of section 234A, 234B

K & R RAIL ENGINEERING LIMITED,SECUNDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS credits, Advance Tax and Self Assessment Tax available in Form 26AS of KVR Rail Infra Projects Pvt Ltd should have been allowed to the assessee company. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) not appreciating the fact that the AO has inappropriately applied the provisions of section 234A, 234B

ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD vs. PATEL SEW JOINTVENTURE, HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

234B of the Act. 5) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned A.O. erred in charging interest u/s 234C of the Act.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a Joint Venture between M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd. and M/s. SEW Infrastructure Ltd., executing infrastructure project for Narmada Valley Development

PATEL SEW JOINT VENTURE,TELANGANA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

234B of the Act. 5) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned A.O. erred in charging interest u/s 234C of the Act.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a Joint Venture between M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd. and M/s. SEW Infrastructure Ltd., executing infrastructure project for Narmada Valley Development

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. DIVI'S LABORATORIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11 Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Divi’S Laboratories Ltd., Income-Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaacd 6745J (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Anil S Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao Date Of Hearing: 20/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/08/2021

234B) 11b 0 c For deferment of advance tax (section 234C) 11c 0 d Total Interest Payable (11a+11b+11c) 11d 0 12 Aggregate liability (10 + 11d) 12 0 13 Taxes Paid a Advance Tax (from Schedule-IT) 13a 0 b TDS

MICROSOFT GLOBAL SERVICES CENTRE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

TDS credit. 5. That on the facts and in law, on disposal of this appeal material adjustment would be required in computing total income, tax, interest under section 234B

INFOR (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS ') amounting to Rs. 3,01,408 attributable to Infor (Bangalore) Private Limited and Rs. 3,49,350 attributable to Approva Systems Private Limited ('transferor companies') which were amalgamated with Appellant with effect from 01 April 2015. 18. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld AO erred in not granting credit

ADP PRIVATE LIMITED,RANGA REDDY vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1( 1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS of INR 2,389. :- 9 -: ITA Nos..227 & 228/Hyd/2021 ADP Pvt. Ltd., Hyd. 23. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the ld. AO erred by granting credit of advance tax of INR 28,30,00,000 as against the eligible advance tax credit of INR 35,66,82,429 available to the Appellant. thereby

ADP PRIVATE LIMITED (31/10/2015),RANGA REDDY vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1( 1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS of INR 2,389. :- 9 -: ITA Nos..227 & 228/Hyd/2021 ADP Pvt. Ltd., Hyd. 23. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the ld. AO erred by granting credit of advance tax of INR 28,30,00,000 as against the eligible advance tax credit of INR 35,66,82,429 available to the Appellant. thereby

SUJATHA KANCHARLA,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 6(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

234B of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, under the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed her return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 on 17-08-2017, declaring an income of Rs. 11,34,16,250/-. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was 3 Sujatha Kancharla, Hyderabad. selected for scrutiny assessment under Computer

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

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

TDS Rs. 26165215 Less : Advance Tax Rs. 12000000 Balance Tax Rs. 32835948 Add: Interest u/s 234A Rs. 1970157 Add: Interest u/s 234B Rs. 10835863 Add: Interest u/s 234C Rs. 0 Total tax + Int payable Rs. 45641967 Less: Self tax paid Rs. Less: Regular by Rs. 29414128 adjustment of refund Balance Payable. Rs. 16227839 Madhucon Projects Limited, Hyderabad. 25. The assessee