TELANGANA STATE MEDICAL SERVICES INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, TDS, RANGE-3, VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, all three appeals under consideration are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

section 200(3) of the I.T. Act any person deducting any sum in accordance with the TDS provisions is required to prepare and deliver the quarterly TDS statements in form No. 24Q and 26Q in respect of TDS on salaries and on payments other than salaries respectively Within the prescribed time. As per :- 5 -: ITA Nos. 1528 to 1530Hyd/2016 Rule

TELANGANA STATE MEDICAL SERVICES INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, TDS, RANGE-3, VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, all three appeals under consideration are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

section 200(3) of the I.T. Act any person deducting any sum in accordance with the TDS provisions is required to prepare and deliver the quarterly TDS statements in form No. 24Q and 26Q in respect of TDS on salaries and on payments other than salaries respectively Within the prescribed time. As per :- 5 -: ITA Nos. 1528 to 1530Hyd/2016 Rule

TELANGANA STATE MEDICAL SERVICES INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, TDS, RANGE-3, VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, all three appeals under consideration are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

section 200(3) of the I.T. Act any person deducting any sum in accordance with the TDS provisions is required to prepare and deliver the quarterly TDS statements in form No. 24Q and 26Q in respect of TDS on salaries and on payments other than salaries respectively Within the prescribed time. As per :- 5 -: ITA Nos. 1528 to 1530Hyd/2016 Rule

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

240,000\nMax Interactive Pty Ltd., Australia\n417,490,000\nDyomo Corporation, USA\n467,300\nYbrant Digital Services De Publicidade Ltda, Brasil\n265,932\nYbrant Digital (Brasil) Ltd., Singapore\n45\nGlobal IT Inc, USA 100% of holding\n659,979,382\n659,979,382\nTechorbit Inc, USA 100% of Holding\n61,884,000\n61,884,000\nLGS Global FZE, UAE\n243

AMARA RAJA POWER SYSTEMS LIMITED,TIRUPATI vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), TIRUPATI

TDS) under Section 194C of the Act of Rs.\n1,36,78,178/- on the contract payments of only Rs.\n82,64,73,583/-. The Pr. CIT, based on the aforesaid facts, held a\nfirm conviction that as the “Faceless Assessing Officer” (for short,\n“FAO”) had, while framing the assessment not verified the reason\nfor non-deduction

THOTA RAMAIAH L/R T VASUNDHARA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

TDS Certificates etc. Ld. AR further submitted that section 40A(3) of the Act is applicable only to those expenditures which were incurred by the assessee with an intention to evade the tax and not applicable to genuine business payments made in the regular course of business. He relied on the decisions of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat

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 is very clear and the appellant has incurred the expenditure and the appellant has made the payment to the various parties and persons. The appellant has, to circumvent, not accounted for the same and has also not brought out any evidence from M/s.DLF that they have accounted for such transactions in their books as cash payments. The MoU cannot

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

240/-. The assessee later filed a revised return of income after claiming 80lA and declared income of Rs. 8,71,79,894/-. :- 5 -: ITA Nos.. 1872 to 1875/Hyd/2019 Madhucon Projects Ltd., Hyd. . 2.1 Before the current search, there was a search in the case of the assessee on 20.10.2005. For the A.Y. 2007-08, the assessment was completed

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

240/-. The assessee later filed a revised return of income after claiming 80lA and declared income of Rs. 8,71,79,894/-. :- 5 -: ITA Nos.. 1872 to 1875/Hyd/2019 Madhucon Projects Ltd., Hyd. . 2.1 Before the current search, there was a search in the case of the assessee on 20.10.2005. For the A.Y. 2007-08, the assessment was completed

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

240/-. The assessee later filed a revised return of income after claiming 80lA and declared income of Rs. 8,71,79,894/-. :- 5 -: ITA Nos.. 1872 to 1875/Hyd/2019 Madhucon Projects Ltd., Hyd. . 2.1 Before the current search, there was a search in the case of the assessee on 20.10.2005. For the A.Y. 2007-08, the assessment was completed

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

240/-. The assessee later filed a revised return of income after claiming 80lA and declared income of Rs. 8,71,79,894/-. :- 5 -: ITA Nos.. 1872 to 1875/Hyd/2019 Madhucon Projects Ltd., Hyd. . 2.1 Before the current search, there was a search in the case of the assessee on 20.10.2005. For the A.Y. 2007-08, the assessment was completed

M/S ANURADHA PROPERTIES & TOWNSHIPS PRIVATE LIMITED,,HYDERABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1,, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the above three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

240 also, it was held that in the case of discrepancies between the sales or receipt amount as per books of accounts and the amount shown in TDS certificate, for taxability purpose, only the embedded portion of the profits is to be considered as taxable and not the entire amount. h) However, in order to buy peace with the Department

M/S ANURADHA PROPERTIES & TOWNSHIPS PRIVATE LIMITED,,HYDERABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1,, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the above three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

240 also, it was held that in the case of discrepancies between the sales or receipt amount as per books of accounts and the amount shown in TDS certificate, for taxability purpose, only the embedded portion of the profits is to be considered as taxable and not the entire amount. h) However, in order to buy peace with the Department

M/S ANURADHA PROPERTIES & TOWNSHIPS PRIVATE LIMITED,,HYDERABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1,, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the above three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

240 also, it was held that in the case of discrepancies between the sales or receipt amount as per books of accounts and the amount shown in TDS certificate, for taxability purpose, only the embedded portion of the profits is to be considered as taxable and not the entire amount. h) However, in order to buy peace with the Department

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 has held as under: “The affidavit filed in support of the application for the condonation of delay disclosed that, after the order was passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), there was a change of managing director. Though the chartered accountant of the company opined that it was a fit case for appeal and prepared

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 has held as under: “The affidavit filed in support of the application for the condonation of delay disclosed that, after the order was passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), there was a change of managing director. Though the chartered accountant of the company opined that it was a fit case for appeal and prepared

CYBERMATE INFOTEK LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2013-14 Cybermate Infotek Ltd., Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 1(4), Hyderabad. Pan – Aabcc 4776F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue By: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai Date Of Hearing: 24/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/09/2021

240/-. :- 2 -: BiologicHyderabad. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices were issued accordingly. In response, the assessee’ AR filed required information. 2.1 The AO completed the assessment assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 8,72,37,838/- as against the returned income of the assessee of Rs. 3,60,241/- by making

C ESWAR REDDY & CO., ,KURNOOL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2015-16 C. Eswar Reddy & Co., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Kurnool. Income-Tax, Circle – 1, Kurnool. Pan – Aacfc 7761J (Appellant) (Respondent)

240/- and gross contract receipts as per P&L account was Rs. 42,51,87,018/-. He, therefore, opined that the difference amount of Rs. 40,29,222/- needs to be brought to tax. 4.1 He further observed that the assessee has claimed TDS credit of Rs. 92,43,080/- against the available credit

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

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

240 ITR 355). Therefore, the accounting method followed by an assessee continuously for a given period of time needs to be presumed to be correct till the AO comes to the conclusion for reasons to be given that the system does not reflect true and correct profits. As stated, there is no finding given by the AO on the correctness