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

bogus under a separate head. The CIT(A) therefore has rightly held it to be an instance of the double addition apart from all other factual and legal aspects. We therefore find no merit in the Revenue's instant former substantive grievance in all these appeals in view of the foregoing clinching reason(s). This identical former substantive ground

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

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

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

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

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

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

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

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

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

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

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

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

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

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

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

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

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

801A as claimed by the assessee. The Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for the asst years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 in ITA Nos.910,911/Hyd/201S, dated 22-01-2016, has upheld the deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the assessee. Respectfully following the Page 21 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch decision

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

801A(4) of the Act, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Hyderabad in the case of NEC-NCC-Maytas JV ITA No.496/H/2018 dated 12.05.2021.” 30. Per contra, the learned AR submitted that the learned CIT(A) had passed the order after seeking a remand report from the Assessing Officer in respect of all the A.Ys

NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

801A(4) of the Act, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Hyderabad in the case of NEC-NCC-Maytas JV ITA No.496/H/2018 dated 12.05.2021.” 30. Per contra, the learned AR submitted that the learned CIT(A) had passed the order after seeking a remand report from the Assessing Officer in respect of all the A.Ys

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

801A(4) of the Act, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Hyderabad in the case of NEC-NCC-Maytas JV ITA No.496/H/2018 dated 12.05.2021.” 30. Per contra, the learned AR submitted that the learned CIT(A) had passed the order after seeking a remand report from the Assessing Officer in respect of all the A.Ys

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

801A(4) of the Act, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Hyderabad in the case of NEC-NCC-Maytas JV ITA No.496/H/2018 dated 12.05.2021.” 30. Per contra, the learned AR submitted that the learned CIT(A) had passed the order after seeking a remand report from the Assessing Officer in respect of all the A.Ys

NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

801A(4) of the Act, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Hyderabad in the case of NEC-NCC-Maytas JV ITA No.496/H/2018 dated 12.05.2021.” 30. Per contra, the learned AR submitted that the learned CIT(A) had passed the order after seeking a remand report from the Assessing Officer in respect of all the A.Ys

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. NCC LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

801A(4) of the Act, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Hyderabad in the case of NEC-NCC-Maytas JV ITA No.496/H/2018 dated 12.05.2021.” 30. Per contra, the learned AR submitted that the learned CIT(A) had passed the order after seeking a remand report from the Assessing Officer in respect of all the A.Ys

NCC LIMITED, ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

801A(4) of the Act, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Hyderabad in the case of NEC-NCC-Maytas JV ITA No.496/H/2018 dated 12.05.2021.” 30. Per contra, the learned AR submitted that the learned CIT(A) had passed the order after seeking a remand report from the Assessing Officer in respect of all the A.Ys

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Sood(Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1083/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Vs. Penna Cement Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcp2290D (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Industries आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1084/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year:2018-19) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hydeabad. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Vs. Penna Cement Industries Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcp2290D (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) करदाताकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Sourabh Soparkar, Advocate राजस्वकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाईसमाप्तहोनेकीतिथि/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 11/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 2

801A. 5.1 The power units started claiming deduction U/s 80IA from the year of profit generation and the same is permissible u/s 80IA. The major concern raised by the AO in the remand report is that the assessee company has not submitted approval / permission / agreement with State / Central Government / Local Authority in accordance with Sub- rule 4 of Rule 18BBB