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

gains before filing the return of income. However, the\nAssessing Officer finalized the penalty order and it came to the\nnotice of the assessee on the last day of hearing of penalty\nproceedings on 25.9.2014 that the AD is going to levy penalty\nu/s.271(1)(c) of the Act in these assessment years. Hence, the\nassessee filed appeals against

WORLDVIEW EDUCATION SERVICES PRIVATE LMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-17(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1056/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2021-2022 Worldview Education Services Private Limited, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Hyderabad – 500 016. Ward-17(1), Telangana. Hyderabad. Pan Aaacw9480F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca C. Maheshwar Reddy राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: G Saratha, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19.12.2025 आदेश/Order

276/-. This expenditure includes an amount of Rs.1,06,63,541/- being refunds and returns, which in the view of Pr. CIT is not an allowable expenditure as the said amount was not offered as income in 3 ITA.No.1056/Hyd./2025 this year. Accordingly, the Pr. CIT invoked provisions of sec.263 of the Act by issuing show cause notice dated

ACIT., CIRCLE-9(1), HYDERABAD vs. RANGAREDDY DIST JUDL EMPLOYEE MUTUALLY AIDED CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY, HYDERABAD

276/-\nclaimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) and Rs.1,20,81,643/- claimed under 80P(2)(d) of the IT\nAct, 1961. In view of the above discussion, the ground of appeal no. 2 is\nallowed.\n5.4 Ground No. 3: Vide this ground of appeal the appellant has challenged the\naddition made by AO in order

ACIT., CIRCLE-9(1), HYDERABAD vs. RANGAREDDY DIST JUDL EMPLOYEE MUTUALLY AIDED COOPERATIVE SOCIETY, HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

276/-; and (ii) U/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act: Rs.1,20,81,643/-. Also, the claim raised by the assessee society for deduction of interest paid on share capital of Rs.13,46,051/- was disallowed. 9. Aggrieved, the assessee society carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A), who found favor with its contentions