THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the S.As. filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

155 shall apply; [( v) where such debt or part of debt relates to advances made by an assessee to which clause (viia) of sub-section (1) applies, no such deduction shall be allowed unless the assessee has debited the amount of such debt or part of debt in that previous year to the provision for bad and doubtful debts account

THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the S.As. filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

155 shall apply; [( v) where such debt or part of debt relates to advances made by an assessee to which clause (viia) of sub-section (1) applies, no such deduction shall be allowed unless the assessee has debited the amount of such debt or part of debt in that previous year to the provision for bad and doubtful debts account

THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the S.As. filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

155 shall apply; [( v) where such debt or part of debt relates to advances made by an assessee to which clause (viia) of sub-section (1) applies, no such deduction shall be allowed unless the assessee has debited the amount of such debt or part of debt in that previous year to the provision for bad and doubtful debts account

THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the S.As. filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

155 shall apply; [( v) where such debt or part of debt relates to advances made by an assessee to which clause (viia) of sub-section (1) applies, no such deduction shall be allowed unless the assessee has debited the amount of such debt or part of debt in that previous year to the provision for bad and doubtful debts account

THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the S.As. filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

155 shall apply; [( v) where such debt or part of debt relates to advances made by an assessee to which clause (viia) of sub-section (1) applies, no such deduction shall be allowed unless the assessee has debited the amount of such debt or part of debt in that previous year to the provision for bad and doubtful debts account

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

155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of sub-clause (b) as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections : Provided further that this clause shall not apply to any sum of money or any property received— (a) from any relative

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

155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of sub-clause (b) as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections. Provided further that this clause shall not apply to any sum of money or any property received- (a) from any relative

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

155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of sub-clause (b) as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections. Provided further that this clause shall not apply to any sum of money or any property received- (a) from any relative

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

155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of sub-clause (b) as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections. Provided further that this clause shall not apply to any sum of money or any property received- (a) from any relative

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

155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of sub-clause (b) as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections. Provided further that this clause shall not apply to any sum of money or any property received- (a) from any relative

RATNA INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYD, HYDERABAD

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

155/- was admitted claiming a depreciation of :- 5 -: ITA Nos.730 & 731/Hyd/2016 C.O.Nos.8 & 9/Hyd/2021 Rs.10,50,35,858/- and books of accounts of the assessee are audited as provided u/s 44AB of the IT Act and as per the Accountants the amount disaIlowable u/s 40A(3) of the IT Act r.w.r 6DD is at Rs.40,20,600/- which is added

RATNA INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYD, HYDERABAD

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

155/- was admitted claiming a depreciation of :- 5 -: ITA Nos.730 & 731/Hyd/2016 C.O.Nos.8 & 9/Hyd/2021 Rs.10,50,35,858/- and books of accounts of the assessee are audited as provided u/s 44AB of the IT Act and as per the Accountants the amount disaIlowable u/s 40A(3) of the IT Act r.w.r 6DD is at Rs.40,20,600/- which is added

DIABETOMICS MEDICAL PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

155\ntaxmann.com 578 (Delhi-Trib);\n8.\nThe next contention of the learned Authorised\nRepresentative of the Assessee is that as per Explanation-(b)\nto sec.56(2)(viib), the ‘Venture Capital Undertaking' [in short\n“VCU"] shall have the meaning assigned to it in Caluse-(c) of\nthe Explanation to sec.10(23FB) of the Act and therefore, the\nmeaning

DIABETOMICS MEDICAL PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the Assessee\nare partly allowed

155\ntaxmann.com 578 (Delhi-Trib);\n8.\nThe next contention of the learned Authorised\nRepresentative of the Assessee is that as per Explanation-(b)\nto sec.56(2)(viib), the ‘Venture Capital Undertaking' [in short\n“VCU"] shall have the meaning assigned to it in Caluse-(c) of\nthe Explanation to sec.10(23FB) of the Act and therefore, the\nmeaning

DIABETOMICS MEDICAL PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

155\ntaxmann.com 578 (Delhi-Trib);\n8.\nThe next contention of the learned Authorised\nRepresentative of the Assessee is that as per Explanation-(b)\nto sec.56(2)(viib), the ‘Venture Capital Undertaking' [in short\n“VCU"] shall have the meaning assigned to it in Caluse-(c) of\nthe Explanation to sec.10(23FB) of the Act and therefore, the\nmeaning

DCIT., CIRCLE-3(1) , HYDERABAD vs. SOUTH ASIAN CERAMIC TILES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

section 69. 6. Appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add any other grounds. which may be necessary.” 2. Succinctly stated, the assessee company which is engaged in the business of manufacturing of ceramic tiles had filed its return of income for AY 2022-23 on 26/10/2022 declaring a loss of (Rs.18,74,49,155/-). Thereafter

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. L & T METRO RAIL (HYDERABAD) LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Vs. L & T Metro Rail Circle-16(1), (Hyderabad) Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcl 8521 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ashik Shah Revenue By: Sri B. Sunil Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 25/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/01/2022 Order Per A. Mohan Alankamony, Am.:

155 (Rajasthan). 5. At the outset, we find that the identical issue was decided in favour of the Revenue by the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in ITA No. 1534/Hyd/2016 in the case of M/s. Thermal Powertech Corporation India Limited for the AY 2012-13 vide Order dated 26/04/2017. The questions framed and answered by the Tribunal on the identical

CAMBRIDGE TECHNOLOGY ENTERPRISES LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.536/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S Cambridge Technology Vs. Dcit Enterprises Limited Circle-1(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aaacu3358G] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Shiva Sewak, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 28/10/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 24/01/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.03.2019 Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax [Ld.Pcit], Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2012-13. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company, Engaged In The Business Of Rendering Software Services, Filed Its Return Of Income For The A.Y.2012-13 On 26.09.2012, Admitting Total Income Of Rs.4,05,55,380/- Under Normal Provisions Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) & Rs.1,47,09173/-

section 263 of the Act. The Ld.PCIT observed from the Profit & Loss account that the assessee has debited an amount of Rs.3,02,45,860/- towards impairment loss on assets. It is seen from the depreciation schedule as well as notes to account that the impairment loss on reusable components was arrived at after testing the carrying value of recorded