ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. HINDUJA NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.235/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) The Assistant M/S. Hinduja National Power Commissioner Of Income Vs. Corporation Ltd. Tax, Circle 2(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabch2426D अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K. A. Sai Prasad, C.A. रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr.

Additionally, excess depreciation of ₹271.70 crore under section 32(1)(iia) was disallowed as the assessee was entitled to depreciation only at 20% for assets used for less than 180 days, instead of the claimed 35%. Consequently, these disallowances were added back to the income

DHANALAXMI IRON INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

additional depreciation u/s. 32(1)(iia) of the Income Tax Act [Act]. In the depreciation schedule as per Income Tax rules

RAJENDER REDDY GUNNA ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

Income Tax Act, 1961 which have been debited in the P & L A/c and added to the total income of the assessee vide order dated 22.03.2013 u/sec.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 70. On being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) after considering

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

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

depreciation. The Assessing Officer also made separate addition on account of gratuitous payment as per seized material for various years amounting to Rs.5.33 crores and has given telescoping effect to the remaining additional income

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

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

depreciation. The Assessing Officer also made separate addition on account of gratuitous payment as per seized material for various years amounting to Rs.5.33 crores and has given telescoping effect to the remaining additional income

MADHUCON PROJECTS LTD, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYD, HYDERABAD

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

depreciation. The Assessing Officer also made separate addition on account of gratuitous payment as per seized material for various years amounting to Rs.5.33 crores and has given telescoping effect to the remaining additional income

PRATHIMA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

income with the depreciation written back by the assessee to be carried forward for subsequent years for application for charitable purposes." 13.2 That is, the assessee is entitled to depreciation on cost of acquisition and also as application of cost of acquisition. In addition

ACIT., CIRCLE-1(1), TIRUPATI vs. SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, TIRUPATI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.244/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 ) Acit Vs. Southern Power Circle 1(1) Distribution Company Of Tirupati Andhra Pradesh, Tirupati Pan:Aahcs4056Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: C.A Mohan Acharya राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/07/2024 आदेश/Order

depreciation @ 15% has made addition of Rs.793.45 crores as income of the assessee. 5. Being aggrieved by the assessment order

VIRCHOW PETROCHEMICAL PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

income. 5. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the assessee company had claimed 100% depreciation of Rs. 7,34,14,979/- on its solar power plant (80% depreciation + 20% additional

TELANGANA STATE POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2016-17 Telangana State Power Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Generation Corporation Income-Tax, Ltd., Hyderabad. Circle – 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aafct 0257Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri M. Chandramouleswara Rao Revenue By: Shri Yvst Sai Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 17/03/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 14 /06/2021 O R D E R Per L.P. Sahu, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee For Ay 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Cit(A) - 2, Hyderabad’S Order, Dated 21/08/2019 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ; In Short “The Act”.

Income Tax Act to power generation companies and the intention of Legislation behind providing such incentives. 4.6 Section 32 (1 )(iia) provides for additional depreciation

PARMATMA COTTONS PRIVATE LIMITED,ADILABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ADILABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

income of the assessee at Rs. 14,15,270/-. Subsequently, it was noticed that assessee claimed additional depreciation on factory

PARMATMA COTTONS PRIVATE LIMITED,ADILABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ADILABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

income of the assessee at Rs. 14,15,270/-. Subsequently, it was noticed that assessee claimed additional depreciation on factory

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

depreciation on goodwill has not attained finality. Unless there is a stay, order/decision of the jurisdictional Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is binding on all income tax authorities within its jurisdiction. Page 45 of 65 ITA Nos 73 to 75 and 77 to 80 of 2017 NCC Ltd 35. In Union of India v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. 1992 taxmann.com

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

depreciation on goodwill has not attained finality. Unless there is a stay, order/decision of the jurisdictional Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is binding on all income tax authorities within its jurisdiction. Page 45 of 65 ITA Nos 73 to 75 and 77 to 80 of 2017 NCC Ltd 35. In Union of India v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. 1992 taxmann.com

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

depreciation on goodwill has not attained finality. Unless there is a stay, order/decision of the jurisdictional Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is binding on all income tax authorities within its jurisdiction. Page 45 of 65 ITA Nos 73 to 75 and 77 to 80 of 2017 NCC Ltd 35. In Union of India v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. 1992 taxmann.com

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

depreciation on goodwill has not attained finality. Unless there is a stay, order/decision of the jurisdictional Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is binding on all income tax authorities within its jurisdiction. Page 45 of 65 ITA Nos 73 to 75 and 77 to 80 of 2017 NCC Ltd 35. In Union of India v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. 1992 taxmann.com

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

depreciation on goodwill has not attained finality. Unless there is a stay, order/decision of the jurisdictional Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is binding on all income tax authorities within its jurisdiction. Page 45 of 65 ITA Nos 73 to 75 and 77 to 80 of 2017 NCC Ltd 35. In Union of India v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. 1992 taxmann.com

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

depreciation on goodwill has not attained finality. Unless there is a stay, order/decision of the jurisdictional Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is binding on all income tax authorities within its jurisdiction. Page 45 of 65 ITA Nos 73 to 75 and 77 to 80 of 2017 NCC Ltd 35. In Union of India v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. 1992 taxmann.com

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

depreciation on goodwill has not attained finality. Unless there is a stay, order/decision of the jurisdictional Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is binding on all income tax authorities within its jurisdiction. Page 45 of 65 ITA Nos 73 to 75 and 77 to 80 of 2017 NCC Ltd 35. In Union of India v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. 1992 taxmann.com