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

255 (Gujarat), wherein the impugned\nreassessment proceedings initiated based on a “change of opinion” was\nset aside by the Hon'ble High Court.\n22. Per contra, Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Ld. CIT, DR submitted that as\nthe AO while framing the original assessment vide his order passed\nunder section 143(3) of the Act, dated 11/12/2018, had not looked into

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LIMITED , HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

Depreciation [now amortization as per (CBDT Circular] and other incidental Office equipment. The entire Plant & Machinery is owned and provided by Gayatri Projects Limited only. As such, the entity is formed by transfer of Plant & Machinery previously used for any purpose and accordingly, it has not fulfilled the condition laid down in Section

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LIMITED , HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

Depreciation [now amortization as per (CBDT Circular] and other incidental Office equipment. The entire Plant & Machinery is owned and provided by Gayatri Projects Limited only. As such, the entity is formed by transfer of Plant & Machinery previously used for any purpose and accordingly, it has not fulfilled the condition laid down in Section

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

Depreciation [now amortization as per (CBDT Circular] and other incidental Office equipment. The entire Plant & Machinery is owned and provided by Gayatri Projects Limited only. As such, the entity is formed by transfer of Plant & Machinery previously used for any purpose and accordingly, it has not fulfilled the condition laid down in Section

MAHESWARI MINING & ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Years: 2016-17 Maheswari Mining & Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Energy Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 16(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aagcm0805N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Y. Ratnamkar& B. Satyanarayana Murthy Revenue By: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai Date Of Hearing: 21/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: /04/2022

depreciation or otherwise) in computing the income chargeable under the head profits and gains of business or profession" of any previous year. With a view to ensure that the manufacturing units which are set up by availing this proposed incentive actually contribute to economic growth of these :- 10 -: M/s Maheswari Mining & Energy Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. backward areas by carrying

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

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

7) The Assessing Officer having perused the books of account-and records Maintained by the Appellant and baying verified them, without adverse findings specifically, should not have invoked the, provisions of section 145 of the Act. 8) The Assessing Officer ought not to have made the add ton of its.40,$1,16,255 separately as expenditure when once the amount

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

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

7) The Assessing Officer having perused the books of account-and records Maintained by the Appellant and baying verified them, without adverse findings specifically, should not have invoked the, provisions of section 145 of the Act. 8) The Assessing Officer ought not to have made the add ton of its.40,$1,16,255 separately as expenditure when once the amount

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

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

7) The Assessing Officer having perused the books of account-and records Maintained by the Appellant and baying verified them, without adverse findings specifically, should not have invoked the, provisions of section 145 of the Act. 8) The Assessing Officer ought not to have made the add ton of its.40,$1,16,255 separately as expenditure when once the amount

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. R P PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S.Godara

7 -: C.O.No.28/Hyd/2019 raise a contention which is contrary to the circulars and instructions issued by the Board. 11. ORDER PASSED IN VIOLATION OF CBDT INSTRUCTION IS NOT SUSTANAIBLE IN LAW Since the Instruction Issued by CBDT is binding on all revenue authorities who are "responsible for implementation of the Act, any proceeding initiated or any order passed making

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(1), HYDERABAD vs. VERTEX PROJECTS LLP (FORMERLY M/S VERTEX PROJECTS LTD) , HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Acit,Circle-10(1) Vs. Vertex Projects Llp Room No.515, 5Th Floor, (Formerly M/S.Vertex A-Block, I.T.Towers, Projects Ltd.) A.C.Guards, #156-159, Paigah House Hyderabad. S.P.Road, Next To Pg College. Secunderabad-500 026. Pan : Aanfv0232C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sriram Seshadri, Ca Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar,Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.04.2023 O R D E R Per Shri Laliet Kumar, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Dated 16.03.2018 For The Ay 2014-15, On The Following Grounds :

255 (Kar.), wherein the computation of book profit with reference to sections 14A and 115JB has been considered and it is held that Explanation 1 in section 115JB(2) has been inserted so as to provide that if any provision for diminution in the value of any asset has been debited to the profit and loss account, it shall

KAMINENI HEALTH SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2013-14 Kamineni Health Services Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Circle 2(1) Pan:Aaack8313R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Advocate Sashank Dundu Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 22/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/03/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 7Th Nov.2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-2, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2013-14. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Healthcare. It Filed Its Return Of Income For The Impugned A.Y Declaring Nil Income After Setting Off Of Business Loss Of Rs.48,33,667/- Under The Normal Provision & Book Profits U/S 115Jb Amounting To Rs. 1,38,45,489/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass & Statutory Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Were Issued To The Assessee To Page 1 Of 16

255. It was observed (at page 270): Page 10 of 16 ITA 90 of 2018 Kamineni Health Services P Ltd "I is no doubt true that, but for the new section, various kinds of arguments could have been raised regarding the year in which such liability should be adjusted. But, we think, arguments could also have been raised

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

7. Any other ground will be raised at the time of hearing”. 8. The learned Counsel for the assessee strongly challenged the order of the learned PCIT in invoking the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the I.T. Act. He submitted that on the date of search on 18.2.2016, no incriminating materials were found. Therefore, in absence of any incriminating material found

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

7. Any other ground will be raised at the time of hearing”. 8. The learned Counsel for the assessee strongly challenged the order of the learned PCIT in invoking the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the I.T. Act. He submitted that on the date of search on 18.2.2016, no incriminating materials were found. Therefore, in absence of any incriminating material found

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

7. Any other ground will be raised at the time of hearing”. 8. The learned Counsel for the assessee strongly challenged the order of the learned PCIT in invoking the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the I.T. Act. He submitted that on the date of search on 18.2.2016, no incriminating materials were found. Therefore, in absence of any incriminating material found

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

7. Any other ground will be raised at the time of hearing”. 8. The learned Counsel for the assessee strongly challenged the order of the learned PCIT in invoking the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the I.T. Act. He submitted that on the date of search on 18.2.2016, no incriminating materials were found. Therefore, in absence of any incriminating material found

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. ARAGEN LIFE SCIENCES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.483/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) A.C.I.T. Vs. Aragen Life Sciences Ltd Circle 2(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aabcg3208J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri S.P. Chidambaram राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Meghnadh Chowhan,Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/05/2024

section 115JB. The judgment in case of Deepak Nitrite Limited(supra) fell in the former category whereas from the brief discussion av ailable in the judgment it appears that case of Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. (supra), fell in the later category. “ 9. In rebuttal, the learned DR submitted that the judgment is applicable as the Delhi Tribunal after relying

ALLCARGO GATI LIMITED(FORMALLY KNOWN AS GATI LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-2(2) HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

255, 260) where a mortage company had raised money by the issue of debentures and debentures stock and incurred expenses in this connection. The English High Court said that the expenses would not be deducted as trading expenses because the amount paid was for raising capital. Differing from the observations made therein, this Court observed that a loan

ALLCARGO GATI LIMITED(FORMALLY KNOWN AS GATI LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

255, 260) where a mortage company had raised money by the issue of debentures and debentures stock and incurred expenses in this connection. The English High Court said that the expenses would not be deducted as trading expenses because the amount paid was for raising capital. Differing from the observations made therein, this Court observed that a loan