DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. HINDUPUR BIO-ENERGY PVT. LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed, and the appeal of Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Hindupur Bio-Energy Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabch0124J. (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross-Appellant) Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Hindupur Bio-Energy Of Income Tax, Private Limited, Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabch0124J. (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross-Appellant) Assessee By: Shri M. Chandramouleswara Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Shri L.V. Bhaskara Reddy, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.12.2023

penalty is correctly levied. In a recent case of Sundaram Finance Ltd (259 Taxman 220 (SC)), the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed SLP against High Court ruling that where assessee claimed depreciation

UNION BANK OF INDIA (ERSTWHILE-ANDHRA BANK),MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

depreciation on investments and Rs.10 lakhs towards penalty. Accordingly, the Ld. AO assessed the total income at Rs.3764,77,47,070/-. 03. Aggrieved

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of revenue is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

depreciation on\ninvestments and Rs.10 lakhs towards penalty. Accordingly, the Ld. AO assessed\nthe total income at Rs.3764,77,47,070/-.\n03. Aggrieved

TEK SYSTEMS GLOBAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERBAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERBAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.487/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Tek Systems Global Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Services (P) Ltd, Circle 2(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabcf1518Q (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Ms. K. Amulya, Ca रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 29/05/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 05/07/2024 आदेश/Order

depreciation of Rs. 44,13,774/- was being disallowed. 5. Penalty proceedings u/s 270A are initiated for under reporting of income

KAMAL ENTERPRISES AND NEW LIFE HOSPITAL,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation on business assets, learned Assessing Officer treated the income of the assessee as income from business and initiated penalty

PEGASYSTEMS WORLDWIDE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD

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

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

penalty and cannot be decided in this quantum appeal. In the circumstances, what remains to be adjudicated in this appeal is ground number 13 relating to the disallowance of depreciation

ALTIUX INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1 (1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1006 To 1008/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Altiux Innovations (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Pan: Aalca9069R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sai Sarikonda, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2025 आदेश/Order

depreciation on intangible assets. Accordingly, the impugned order of the learned CIT (A) is set aside and the matter in quantum appeal is remanded to the record of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after giving one more opportunity to the assessee to produce all the relevant supporting evidences. 7. In the appeals against the penalty

ALTIUX INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1006 To 1008/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Altiux Innovations (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Pan: Aalca9069R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sai Sarikonda, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2025 आदेश/Order

depreciation on intangible assets. Accordingly, the impugned order of the learned CIT (A) is set aside and the matter in quantum appeal is remanded to the record of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after giving one more opportunity to the assessee to produce all the relevant supporting evidences. 7. In the appeals against the penalty

ALTIUX INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE- 1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1006 To 1008/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Altiux Innovations (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Pan: Aalca9069R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sai Sarikonda, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2025 आदेश/Order

depreciation on intangible assets. Accordingly, the impugned order of the learned CIT (A) is set aside and the matter in quantum appeal is remanded to the record of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after giving one more opportunity to the assessee to produce all the relevant supporting evidences. 7. In the appeals against the penalty

REPAL GREEN POWER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.125/Hyd/2022 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Repal Green Power Private Limited, The Dcit, Circle-8(1), Vs. Hyderabad. Hyderabad – 500 081 Pan Aahcr2187F (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.474/Hyd/2022 Assessment Year 2018-2019 Repal Green Power Private Limited, The Dcit, Circle-3(1), Vs. Hyderabad. Hyderabad – 500 081 Pan Aahcr2187F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri Harsh R Shah, Advocate & Ca Karan Jain राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

depreciation under Section 32(iia) ought to be granted is 35 per cent and not 20 per cent. Investment allowance under Section 32AC 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. AO, under the direction of the Hon'ble DRP, erred in not appreciating that the Appellant ought to be granted investment allowance

REPAL GREEN POWER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are\nallowed

depreciation under Section 32(iia) ought to be\ngranted is 35 per cent and not 20 per cent.\nInvestment allowance under Section 32AC\n8. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. AO,\nunder the direction of the Hon'ble DRP, erred in not appreciating\nthat the Appellant ought to be granted investment allowance

BIOGENEX LIFE SCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

Depreciation and allowance of Rs. 1,87,83,938/-under section 35(4) of the Act while passing the Final Assessment Order dated 27.01.2022. 9. The Ld. AO/ TPO / DRP erred in not considering the MAT credit of Rs. 27,66,279/- available under section 115JB of the Act while passing the Final Assessment Order dated

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

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

depreciation accordingly. Hence, this ground of appeal is partly allowed. 15. The assessee challenged the order passed under section 250 with reference to section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act 1961 by the ld.CIT(A) dt.27.05.2011 before the ITAT. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in the appeal under section 250 with reference to section

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

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

depreciation accordingly. Hence, this ground of appeal is partly allowed. 15. The assessee challenged the order passed under section 250 with reference to section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act 1961 by the ld.CIT(A) dt.27.05.2011 before the ITAT. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in the appeal under section 250 with reference to section

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

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

depreciation accordingly. Hence, this ground of appeal is partly allowed. 15. The assessee challenged the order passed under section 250 with reference to section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act 1961 by the ld.CIT(A) dt.27.05.2011 before the ITAT. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in the appeal under section 250 with reference to section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), HYDERABAD vs. ATHENA GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED (FORMERLY M/S VJIL CONSULTING LIMITED), HYDERABAD

In the result, the ground nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

depreciation as per law. As the bills / vouchers submitted by the assessee were required to be verified with the records of the assessee and the period for which the fixed assets were put to use for business purpose during the year under consideration were also required to be verified, we do not find any infirmity in the order

ATHENA GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the ground nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

depreciation as per law. As the bills / vouchers submitted by the assessee were required to be verified with the records of the assessee and the period for which the fixed assets were put to use for business purpose during the year under consideration were also required to be verified, we do not find any infirmity in the order

XILINX INDIA TECHNOLOGY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the ground nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

depreciation as per law. As the bills / vouchers submitted by the assessee were required to be verified with the records of the assessee and the period for which the fixed assets were put to use for business purpose during the year under consideration were also required to be verified, we do not find any infirmity in the order