ALPA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee company is partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

2(24)(xviii) will not be applicable. (iv). We are of the view that amortization of a capital subsidy in itself is not allowable as a direct deduction under Section 80-IC or under the Income Tax Act, but rather, the impact of the capital subsidy is reflected in the reduced "actual cost" of the asset, leading to a claim

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

gains on slump sales. Learned counsel’s first and foremost argument before us is that the corresponding sales in relation to which the impugned outstanding receivables are considered have already been offered to tax in preceding assessment years’ computation(s). The Revenue’s stand on the other hand is that the instant issue more requires a reconciliation than any substantive

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE2-(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

gains on slump sales. Learned counsel’s first and foremost argument before us is that the corresponding sales in relation to which the impugned outstanding receivables are considered have already been offered to tax in preceding assessment years’ computation(s). The Revenue’s stand on the other hand is that the instant issue more requires a reconciliation than any substantive

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

gains on slump sales. Learned counsel’s first and foremost argument before us is that the corresponding sales in relation to which the impugned outstanding receivables are considered have already been offered to tax in preceding assessment years’ computation(s). The Revenue’s stand on the other hand is that the instant issue more requires a reconciliation than any substantive

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. 500082 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE2-(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

gains on slump sales. Learned counsel’s first and foremost argument before us is that the corresponding sales in relation to which the impugned outstanding receivables are considered have already been offered to tax in preceding assessment years’ computation(s). The Revenue’s stand on the other hand is that the instant issue more requires a reconciliation than any substantive

KRISHNAKUMAR MANDA,MEDCHAL vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-12(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 1016 & 1017/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2021-22) Shri Krishnakumar Manda, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Medchal Income Tax Pan:Bmspm9739D Circle 12(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Phaneendra Nag, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

xviii) of Sub section 2 of Section 144B i.e. in not serving the Draft assessment order along with Show Cause notice before finalizing the assessment, which would amount to breach of not only Principles of Natural Justice but also of the action in complete disregard to the Statutory Provision. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to appreciate the fact that

KRISHNAKUMAR MANDA,MEDCHAL vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-12(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 1016 & 1017/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2021-22) Shri Krishnakumar Manda, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Medchal Income Tax Pan:Bmspm9739D Circle 12(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Phaneendra Nag, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

xviii) of Sub section 2 of Section 144B i.e. in not serving the Draft assessment order along with Show Cause notice before finalizing the assessment, which would amount to breach of not only Principles of Natural Justice but also of the action in complete disregard to the Statutory Provision. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to appreciate the fact that

VALUELABS LLP,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी. सं/Ita No.1609/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2020-21) Valuelabs Llp, Hyderabad. Vs. Dcit, Pan: Aakfv2276K Central Circle-8(1), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of 06/03/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Firm Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 13/08/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, "The Act"), Dated 27/09/2022 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 23/11/2021. The Assessee Firm Has Assailed The Impugned Order Of The Cit(A) On The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

2(24)(xviii) of the Act, and therefore, the same cannot be taxed as business income at the normal rate. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the RECs were issued to the assessee by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), whereas in fact, RECs are issued as transferable and tradable credit certificates under the provisions