ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCC HES JV, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

TDS details, which the assessee duly furnished. After reviewing\nthe submitted details, a show cause notice, dated 20.12.2019, was\nissued, requiring the assessee to explain why the deduction u/s 80IA\nshould not be disallowed. Thereafter, assessee furnished his reply.\nAfter verification of the submissions made by the assessee, Assessing\nOfficer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act\ndt.30.12.2019

SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly\nallowed for statistical purposes

TDS at Rs.9,42,69,564 as against\nRs. 10,21,50,744\n7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO erred\nin the levy of the interest under Section 234A and 234B of the Act\n8. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, vary and/or\nwithdraw any or all the above grounds

SABIR , SEW & PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

TDS under Section 194C is applicable to\npayments made by broadcasting and telecasting companies\n(including production of programs for broadcasting or telecasting)\nto advertising agencies and payments by advertising agencies to\nmedia owners (such as Doordarshan, newspapers, etc.) and it can\nnot be extended the activities of the assessee.\n14. It was submitted that after the issuance

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(4), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Bleassessment Year – 2017-18 Prathima Infrastructure Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Filmnagar, Central Circle – 2(4), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabcp2098P. (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee By: Shri K.C.Devdas, Ca Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.11.2024

section 801A(4) of the Act or not, the Joint Venture Agreement dated 02.01.2009 entered between M/s. HCC-MEIL- BHEL (UV) (Principal Contractor) & Govt. of Andhra pradesh, Letter of Intent dated 16.10.2015, Work Order Agreement dated 02.12.2008 issued by Govt. of Andhra Pradesh in respect of project Pranahitha Chavella Lift Irrigation Scheme link-IV Package No.10, Work Order No.SCLIS

SANGHI INDUSTRIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -3 (1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

TDS to the tune of Rs. 30,211/- without assigning any reasons therefor. 10. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds during the course of hearing.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee-company is engaged in manufacturing of Clinker and Ordinary Portland Cement. The assessee, being the third largest cement

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

801A vide Finance Act 2007)\nwhich was introduced to unambiguously explain that\nonly those enterprises that have entered development\nagreement with Central or State or Local authorities and\ninvest their own funds to develop such facilities will\nonly be eligible for benefit of deduction.\n6. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any\nground or add any other grounds

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), HYDERBAD vs. SEW INFRASTUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

801A vide Finance Act 2007)\nwhich was introduced to unambiguously explain that\nonly those enterprises that have entered development\nagreement with Central or State or Local authorities and\ninvest their own funds to develop such facilities will\nonly be eligible for benefit of deduction.\n\n6.\nThe appellant craves leave to amend or alter any\nground or add any other

CELESTIAL AVENUES PVT LTD REP. BY CSK PROPERTIES PVT LTD ON MERGER-PAN-AADCC3990R,HYDERABAD. vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha G, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.212 To 214/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/S. Sabir, Sew & The Deputy Commissioner Of Prasad, Jv, Vs. Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 6(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Abcfs2425A अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

801A(4) of the Act. Thus, the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed.” 6. Feeling aggrieved with the order of LD.CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before us. 6.1. First, we will deal with the additional grounds raised by the assessee. 7. Before us, the ld.AR submitted that the assessment order was passed

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

801A vide Finance Act 2007)\nwhich was introduced to unambiguously explain that\nonly those enterprises that have entered development\nagreement with Central or State or Local authorities and\ninvest their own funds to develop such facilities will\nonly be eligible for benefit of deduction.\n6. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any\nground or add any other grounds

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result appeals filed by the Revenue\nITA

801A vide Finance Act 2007)\nwhich was introduced to unambiguously explain that\nonly those enterprises that have entered development\nagreement with Central or State or Local authorities and\ninvest their own funds to develop such facilities will\nonly be eligible for benefit of deduction.\n6. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any\nground or add any other grounds

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

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

TDS was made on such amounts. During the asst. proceedings, only self-made Vouchers were shown to have been produced and some of the amounts were also used for payment as expenses against public policy such as penalty, gratuitous payments etc. For the said reasons the AO disallowed the entire a mounts of Rs. 15,83,00,000/-, treating

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LIMITED , HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

TDS was made on such amounts. During the asst. proceedings, only self-made Vouchers were shown to have been produced and some of the amounts were also used for payment as expenses against public policy such as penalty, gratuitous payments etc. For the said reasons the AO disallowed the entire a mounts of Rs. 15,83,00,000/-, treating

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

TDS was made on such amounts. During the asst. proceedings, only self-made Vouchers were shown to have been produced and some of the amounts were also used for payment as expenses against public policy such as penalty, gratuitous payments etc. For the said reasons the AO disallowed the entire a mounts of Rs. 15,83,00,000/-, treating

SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

TDS was not paid in time. Page 33 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch 68. In appeal, learned CIT(A) allowed the claim of deduction. So far as the disallowance of deduction under section 80-IA of the Act is concerned, the learned CIT(A) upheld the action of the CPC in disallowing the claim of deduction under

SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

TDS was not paid in time. Page 33 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch 68. In appeal, learned CIT(A) allowed the claim of deduction. So far as the disallowance of deduction under section 80-IA of the Act is concerned, the learned CIT(A) upheld the action of the CPC in disallowing the claim of deduction under

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE2-(2), HYDERABAD vs. SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

TDS was not paid in time. Page 33 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch 68. In appeal, learned CIT(A) allowed the claim of deduction. So far as the disallowance of deduction under section 80-IA of the Act is concerned, the learned CIT(A) upheld the action of the CPC in disallowing the claim of deduction under

SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

TDS was not paid in time. Page 33 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch 68. In appeal, learned CIT(A) allowed the claim of deduction. So far as the disallowance of deduction under section 80-IA of the Act is concerned, the learned CIT(A) upheld the action of the CPC in disallowing the claim of deduction under

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

TDS was not paid in time. Page 33 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch 68. In appeal, learned CIT(A) allowed the claim of deduction. So far as the disallowance of deduction under section 80-IA of the Act is concerned, the learned CIT(A) upheld the action of the CPC in disallowing the claim of deduction under