RAJENDRA KUMAR VEMULURI, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-2(1) HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees’ are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2006-07 Rajendra Kumar Vemuluri, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Circle – 2(1), Pan – Abipv 2940B Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Nagabhushanam Vemuluri, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Circle – 2(1), Pan – Abipv 2941A Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey Date Of Hearing: 25/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/04/2021

depreciation as assessed under IT act, miscellaneous expenditure, differed tax provision while calculating accumulated profits/surplus of the company at the time calculating deemed dividend

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION, HYDERABAD

Appeal is allowed”

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

Depreciation adjustment 14.00 Less: Profit on sale of investments, assets and dividend received 7.69 Less: Interest on staff advances 99.63 Less: Interest on bank deposits 191.39 Less: Rents received 178.99 Other income 289.91 1053.61 Business from normal activities 10158.79 Ratio of Long term and other than long 89.78/10.22 term business Profit attributable to Long term loans

BBR PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

Dividend Distribution Tax by M/s Vivimed Labs Limited and directed the learned Assessing Officer to verify the same and if it is found to be correct then to delete the addition. Further, the assessee also took a new ground before the learned CIT(A) contending that since the income received from the flat is a business income, the assessee

LANCO ENTERPRISE PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD (ERSTWHILE DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA Nos. 236 & 237/Hyd/2023 are allowed for statistical purposes and ITA No

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

dividend by private companies are subject to tax in the hands of shareholders and hence section14A should not be invoked as income is not exempt from tax and forms part of total income. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that AO erred in disallowing the depreciation claimed on life fitness use XB of Rs.48

LANCO ENTERPRISE PRIVATE LIMITED ,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD (ERSTWHILE DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1)), HYDERABAD ,, HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA Nos. 236 & 237/Hyd/2023 are allowed for statistical purposes and ITA No

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

dividend by private companies are subject to tax in the hands of shareholders and hence section14A should not be invoked as income is not exempt from tax and forms part of total income. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that AO erred in disallowing the depreciation claimed on life fitness use XB of Rs.48

LANCO ENTERPRISE PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD (ERSTWHILE DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1)), HYDERABAD ,, HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA Nos. 236 & 237/Hyd/2023 are allowed for statistical purposes and ITA No

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

dividend by private companies are subject to tax in the hands of shareholders and hence section14A should not be invoked as income is not exempt from tax and forms part of total income. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that AO erred in disallowing the depreciation claimed on life fitness use XB of Rs.48

HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2014-15

Dividend income - - 83 02 Profit before tax 14,002 31.6 12,357 33.6 Tax expense 3,808 8.6 3,241 8.8 Profit after tax and exceptional 10,194 23.0 9,116 24.8 item 23. The function-wise classification of the Consolidated Statement of Profit and Loss is as follows: Year ended March 31 2014 % 2013 % Income from software services

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

dividend and asset base. (d) Business of the company ITA No.39/Hyd/2024 Page 26 This part would explain the business of a company, i.e., whether trading or manufacturing, the items dealt in or manufactured, the location of the factory, factors peculiar to the business, and such other matters. (e) Sources of information This section may state the sources of information obtained

N JAIDEEP REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

deemed to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. In the instant case, it is clearly evident from the verification of record that the AO has not enquired about the FMV of the share purchased by the assessee. 6. The ld.PCIT further noted that the provisions of section

K VIJAYA BHASKAR REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

deemed to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. In the instant case, it is clearly evident from the verification of record that the AO has not enquired about the FMV of the share purchased by the assessee. 6. The ld.PCIT further noted that the provisions of section

K LAXMA REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

deemed to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. In the instant case, it is clearly evident from the verification of record that the AO has not enquired about the FMV of the share purchased by the assessee. 6. The ld.PCIT further noted that the provisions of section

N JAIVEER REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

deemed to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. In the instant case, it is clearly evident from the verification of record that the AO has not enquired about the FMV of the share purchased by the assessee. 6. The ld.PCIT further noted that the provisions of section

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCL GREEN HABITATS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

depreciation and interest amounts can be compared they are not at al near to projections, there is huge variation to projections and actual. Further, in the valuati9on report, the average share value was arrived by taking the share valued as per DOE method, Book Value Method and Market value of properties, but, in the same valuation report it failed

LYCOS INTERNET LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

dividend income during the year under consideration. Accordingly, in view of the facts as discussed above, we do not find any error or illegality in the impugned order of the learned CIT (A) qua on this issue. The same is upheld. 10. With regard to grounds of appeal No.5 & 6 are concerned, the Assessing Officer has made an addition

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

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

CORTEVA AGRISCIENCE SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the Ground No

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

Dividend income 0.05 4616.14 Profit before Taxation 3699.96 1162.83 Provision for Taxation 1116.69 2853.31 Net profit 2593.27 N. NOTES TO THE ACCOUNTS (Contd.) Other Information Segment Assets Segment Liabilties 2010-2011 2010-11 2009-2010 2009-2010 4460.35 1,366.09 1,1941.41 Manufacturing 4558.68 Trading & Indenting 4606.17 3824.30 2010.37 1468.87 Others 14164.21 10678.99 9493.13 7518.47 Capital Expenditure Depreciation

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. TRIDENT CHEMPHAR LIMITED, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Trident Chemphar Ltd. Hyderabad. Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pan : Aaeft8416H. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri B.G. Reddy Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.01.2023

depreciation and Rs.45,43,61,857/- towards commission payment. 4 4. Feeling aggrieved with the order of Assessing Officer, assessee carried the matter before ld.CIT(A), who allowed the appeal of assessee. The relevant observation of Ld.CIT(A) are mentioned in Para 5.42, 5.43, 5.44 and also in 5.45 to the following effect. “5.4.2 I have considered the submissions