SHANKAR LAL AGARWAL,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary

capital gains as ‘un-accounted income’; and it is for the assessee to establish creditworthiness of companies and that rise of price of shares within a short period of time was genuine, genuineness could not be established merely on basis of documents like bank details, purchase/sale documents and detail of demat account. Hon’ble Court further held that in absence

ASIAN INSTITUTE OF GASTROENTEROLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both the assessment years 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 are allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

dividend income and capital gain is taxable for the year under consideration, still the provisions of section 14A is applicable because, when assessee makes several investments in various companies and out of such investments, only one or two investments yield exempt 11 ITA.Nos.609 & 610/Hyd./2025 income and remaining investments does not yield exempt income, then, the expenses relatable

CHINTALAPATI HOLDINGS PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

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

deem it just and convenient to dispose of these appeals by ITA No. 385 & 386/Hyd/2015 way of this common order, taking the appeal for the assessment year 2010-11 as a lead case. 2. Briefly stated relevant facts are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of earning income by way of interest from inter corporate loans

CHINTALAPATI HOLDINGS PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

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

deem it just and convenient to dispose of these appeals by ITA No. 385 & 386/Hyd/2015 way of this common order, taking the appeal for the assessment year 2010-11 as a lead case. 2. Briefly stated relevant facts are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of earning income by way of interest from inter corporate loans

CHINTALAPATI HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

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

deem it just and convenient to dispose of these appeals by ITA No. 385 & 386/Hyd/2015 way of this common order, taking the appeal for the assessment year 2010-11 as a lead case. 2. Briefly stated relevant facts are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of earning income by way of interest from inter corporate loans

VISHAN RAJ JAIN (HUF),HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (2), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Vishan Raj Jain (Huf) Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(2) 6-3-650, G7 6-3-650, G7, Aaykar Bhawan Maheswari Chambers Opp:L.B.Stadium Somajiguda Basheer Bagh Telangana-500 082 Hyderabad-500 004

dividend etc. None of the parameters, which are essential for increase of price of share was present. In spite of this, if the share price is increased multi folded, then it is definitely due to artificial increase. The table in the assessment order clearly indicates that there is manipulation in trading of M/s. Surabhi Chemicals & Investments Limited, which clearly establishes

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. PRAKASH NIMMAGADDA, HYDERABAD, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.974/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy.Cit Vs. Shri Prakash Nimmagadda Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acbpn4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/12/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order, Dated 20/03/2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-9, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:

dividend or distribute profit now because in this year you sold shares of M/s Bharati Cements at profit? Ans: We are looking for further investment opportunity using the funds". When the issue of perquisite taxable in the hands of the assessee was pointed out to him in the statement referred above, he stated that as it is a legal issue

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. MADINENI SITARAMAIAH, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed, and the cross- objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Us:

dividend arose directly from the examination of unsecured loans, which was the very reason for the case being selected for limited scrutiny. However, on merits, the CIT(Appeals) accepted the assessee’s two-fold explanation, viz. (i). that an amount of Rs. 1,15,61,000/- that was received by the assessee in 6 tranches over the period 24/04/2017

ASIAN INSTITUTE OF GASTROENTEROLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for\nboth the

Capital gain\".\nTherefore, in our considered view, once the income from\ninvestments is taxable including dividend income and\ncapital gain, then, disallowance of expenses relatable to said\ninvestments under section 14A read with Rule 8D does not\narise for the assessment year 2021-2022. Although, the\nassessee has brought all these facts to the notice of the\nlearned PCIT

SHRI RAMPRIYA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1946/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Shri Rampriya Developers Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (P) Ltd Circle 3(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aajcs6629P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/08/2024 आदेश/Order

dividend income and therefore, the provisions of section 14A have no application and therefore, the entire interest expenditure on borrowed fund amounting to Rs.35,60,747/- needs to be allowed. 8. The learned DR, on the other hand, supporting the orders of the authorities below submitted that the learned CIT (A) have analyzed the funds borrowed from banks and investment

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(1), HYDERABAD vs. VERTEX PROJECTS LLP (FORMERLY M/S VERTEX PROJECTS LTD) , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Acit,Circle-10(1) Vs. Vertex Projects Llp Room No.515, 5Th Floor, (Formerly M/S.Vertex A-Block, I.T.Towers, Projects Ltd.) A.C.Guards, #156-159, Paigah House Hyderabad. S.P.Road, Next To Pg College. Secunderabad-500 026. Pan : Aanfv0232C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sriram Seshadri, Ca Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar,Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.04.2023 O R D E R Per Shri Laliet Kumar, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Dated 16.03.2018 For The Ay 2014-15, On The Following Grounds :

gain will arise nor any deeming charge u/s. 56 of the receipt of property / assets / shares etc., can be attributed for improper consideration. The appellant presents a scheme to the High Court along with the valuation and the method in which the same is done and once the same is approved, the amalgamation order is passed accordingly, the same

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD vs. DRS LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED , SECUNDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

Capital Gains Rs.22,12,74,800/- This has resulted into short computation of total income of Rs.22,12,74,800/- with a tax effect of Rs.10,00,31,035/-. After verification of the facts from the assessment record this aspect needs thorough verification. B) Besides the above it is also observed that deficiencies in the interest calculation u/s 234A

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. B.RAMALINGA RAJU , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

capitalized nor considered for any revenue expenditure. otherwise. enclosed." Therefore, there is no impact as to the income or A separate statement indicating the position of such advances is 7.3 From the above, it is clear that the assessee is not coming forward with the facts and simply furnished an evasive reply. 7.4 As mentioned above, Sri B. Ramalinga Raju

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. B.RAMALINGA RAJU, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

capitalized nor considered for any revenue expenditure. otherwise. enclosed." Therefore, there is no impact as to the income or A separate statement indicating the position of such advances is 7.3 From the above, it is clear that the assessee is not coming forward with the facts and simply furnished an evasive reply. 7.4 As mentioned above, Sri B. Ramalinga Raju

GORLAS INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ,WARD 2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

gains from business and profession. The Ld. CIT(A) had examined the contention of the assessee and in Para no. 5.6 and 5.7 of his order has held as under : “5.6 Coming to the merits of reopening the case, as already stated before, there was no scrutiny assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act done by the AO prior

PATHFINDER PUBLISHING PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE -16(2), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

gain made on sale of assets or addition of capital only. There cannot be any isolated increase in working capital without the corresponding increase in liability either long term or short term. In fact, in the instant case, the assessee ITA No.39/Hyd/2024 Page 6 presented a masked picture under the permitted valuation rule but providing a hypothetical figure, which

DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. M/S. ARAGEN LIFE SCIENCES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.639/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Dy. Cit Vs. M/S. Aragen Life Sciences Ltd Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabcg3208J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sp Chidambaram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Narender Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/07/2025 आदेश/Order

gains arising on transactions in securities; or (B)the interest, [dividend,] royalty or fees for technical services chargeable to tax at the rate or rates specified in Chapter XII, (fb)the amount or amounts of expenditure relatable to income accruing or arising to an assessee, being a foreign company, from,—if the income-tax payable thereon in accordance with

ALLCARGO GATI LIMITED(FORMALLY KNOWN AS GATI LIMITED),SECUNDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-2(2),, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2009-10 All Cargo Gati Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(2), Hyderabad. (Formerly Known As Gati Limited), Mumbai. Pan : Aabcg3709Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Madhur Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By: Ms. K. Haritha, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.06.2024 01.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement:

capital gains of Rs.18,15,36,931/-. After setting off the losses, the company admitted net loss of Rs.34,23,21,170/-. Subsequently, the assessee has filed revised return of income on 28.01.2011, declaring net loss of Rs.29,76,21,170/-, after disallowing notional loss of Rs.4,47,00,000/-. The return was processed