BASANTH LAL SAH,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us :

purchases of Rs. 10.51 crore (supra) as bogus primarily for four reasons viz. (i). the parties had not filed their returns of income; (ii). the supplier parties did not respond to notice under Section 133

SREE NAGENDRA CONSTRUCTIONS,,KHAMMAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

section 68, I find\nthat the appellant has brought substantial material on record\nto show that these are sundry creditor for purchases paid in\nsubsequent years and that part of the purchases from the very\nparties were already accepted by the Assessing Officer.\nEvidently, the creditors were held to be bogus on the ground\nthat enquiry letters under sec. 133

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

purchased, in some cases land extent differed and in certain instances lands were taken on lease. The learned counsel submitted that in several cases, the consideration recorded in the books matches the payments made through banking channels, which clearly establishes that the Excel sheet was not acted upon in its original form. Therefore, he submitted that, the additions made

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

purchased, in some cases land extent differed and in certain instances lands were taken on lease. The learned counsel submitted that in several cases, the consideration recorded in the books matches the payments made through banking channels, which clearly establishes that the Excel sheet was not acted upon in its original form. Therefore, he submitted that, the additions made

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

purchased, in some cases land extent differed and in certain instances lands were taken on lease. The learned counsel submitted that in several cases, the consideration recorded in the books matches the payments made through banking channels, which clearly establishes that the Excel sheet was not acted upon in its original form. Therefore, he submitted that, the additions made

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

purchased, in some cases land extent differed and in certain instances lands were taken on lease. The learned counsel submitted that in several cases, the consideration recorded in the books matches the payments made through banking channels, which clearly establishes that the Excel sheet was not acted upon in its original form. Therefore, he submitted that, the additions made

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

purchased, in some cases land extent differed and in certain instances lands were taken on lease. The learned counsel submitted that in several cases, the consideration recorded in the books matches the payments made through banking channels, which clearly establishes that the Excel sheet was not acted upon in its original form. Therefore, he submitted that, the additions made

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

purchased, in some cases land extent differed and in certain instances lands were taken on lease. The learned counsel submitted that in several cases, the consideration recorded in the books matches the payments made through banking channels, which clearly establishes that the Excel sheet was not acted upon in its original form. Therefore, he submitted that, the additions made

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

purchased, in some cases land extent differed and in certain instances lands were taken on lease. The learned counsel submitted that in several cases, the consideration recorded in the books matches the payments made through banking channels, which clearly establishes that the Excel sheet was not acted upon in its original form. Therefore, he submitted that, the additions made

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

purchased, in some cases land extent differed and in certain instances lands were taken on lease. The learned counsel submitted that in several cases, the consideration recorded in the books matches the payments made through banking channels, which clearly establishes that the Excel sheet was not acted upon in its original form. Therefore, he submitted that, the additions made

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

purchased, in some cases land extent differed and in certain instances lands were taken on lease. The learned counsel submitted that in several cases, the consideration recorded in the books matches the payments made through banking channels, which clearly establishes that the Excel sheet was not acted upon in its original form. Therefore, he submitted that, the additions made

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

purchased, in some cases land extent differed and in certain instances lands were taken on lease. The learned counsel submitted that in several cases, the consideration recorded in the books matches the payments made through banking channels, which clearly establishes that the Excel sheet was not acted upon in its original form. Therefore, he submitted that, the additions made

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

purchased, in some cases land extent differed and in certain instances lands were taken on lease. The learned counsel submitted that in several cases, the consideration recorded in the books matches the payments made through banking channels, which clearly establishes that the Excel sheet was not acted upon in its original form. Therefore, he submitted that, the additions made

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

purchased, in some cases land extent differed and in certain instances lands were taken on lease. The learned counsel submitted that in several cases, the consideration recorded in the books matches the payments made through banking channels, which clearly establishes that the Excel sheet was not acted upon in its original form. Therefore, he submitted that, the additions made

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

section 80G in respect of CSR expenditure incurred by the assessee company. 48. Ostensibly, the AO had disallowed the claim for deduction under section 80G in respect of CSR expenditure incurred by the assessee company, on the ground that CSR expenditure is mandatory and hence donations made therefrom cannot be regarded as voluntary. 49. On appeal, the CIT(Appeals

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Section 14A cannot be\nmechanically made by invoking Rule 8D in a routine or automatic\nmanner, we are of the view that, though the CIT(Appeals) has\nproceeded on an incorrect factual premise regarding absence of exempt\nincome, but the disallowance under section 14A is even otherwise not\nsustainable on the ground that the AO has failed to record

FARMAX INDIA LIMITED,,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed and the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2009-10 Farmax India Limited Vs. Dcit,Circle-1(3) 4Th Floor, Alluri Trade Centre I.T.Towers, A.C.Guards Bhagayanagar Colony Masab Tank Opp.Kphb Colony Hyderabad Kukatpally Hyderabad-500 072

purchase the shares for substantial amount. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Lovely Exports Pvt.Ltd. was also considered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. In the instant case, the appellant neither produced the shareholders nor their lenders for examination by the Assessing Officer, neither the identity is proved nor the creditworthiness

DCIT, CIRCLE-17(1),HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. FARMAX INDIA LTD., HYD, R.R.DIST

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed and the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2009-10 Farmax India Limited Vs. Dcit,Circle-1(3) 4Th Floor, Alluri Trade Centre I.T.Towers, A.C.Guards Bhagayanagar Colony Masab Tank Opp.Kphb Colony Hyderabad Kukatpally Hyderabad-500 072

purchase the shares for substantial amount. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Lovely Exports Pvt.Ltd. was also considered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. In the instant case, the appellant neither produced the shareholders nor their lenders for examination by the Assessing Officer, neither the identity is proved nor the creditworthiness