ZUARI CEMENT LIMITED ,KADAPA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KADAPA

Accordingly, this issue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

depreciation under section 32(1) (iia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in the subsequent year. b) Objection No. 1.30: Claim of provision for site restoration fund. c) Objection No. 1.31: Claim for prevision for obsolescence of spares. d) Objection No. 1.32 : Claim for Community development expenses e) Objection No. 1.33 : Claim for giveaways f) Objection No. 1.34 : Claim towards

ZUARI CEMENT LIMITED,KADAPA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), KADAPA

Accordingly, this issue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

depreciation under section 32(1) (iia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in the subsequent year. b) Objection No. 1.30: Claim of provision for site restoration fund. c) Objection No. 1.31: Claim for prevision for obsolescence of spares. d) Objection No. 1.32 : Claim for Community development expenses e) Objection No. 1.33 : Claim for giveaways f) Objection No. 1.34 : Claim towards

ZUARI CEMENT LIMITED, KADAPA,KADAPA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KADAPA, KADAPA

Accordingly, this issue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

depreciation under section 32(1) (iia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in the subsequent year. b) Objection No. 1.30: Claim of provision for site restoration fund. c) Objection No. 1.31: Claim for prevision for obsolescence of spares. d) Objection No. 1.32 : Claim for Community development expenses e) Objection No. 1.33 : Claim for giveaways f) Objection No. 1.34 : Claim towards

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result. appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

section 35(2AB) of the Act and disallowance u/se.14A of the Act. 8. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the appellant company and the Revenue are now in appeal before the Tribunal. 9. The first issue that came-up for consideration from grounds of appeal of the appellant company is, TP adjustment in respect of sale

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

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

depreciation. Further, we make it clear that once the income of the assessee is estimated there cannot by an further addition on any account under the head 'income from business' as held by the co-ordinate Bench in the case of Vishal Infrastructure Ltd., (104 ITD 537) (Hyd). However, income from other heads would be computed separately.” Madhucon Projects Limited

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

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

depreciation. Further, we make it clear that once the income of the assessee is estimated there cannot by an further addition on any account under the head 'income from business' as held by the co-ordinate Bench in the case of Vishal Infrastructure Ltd., (104 ITD 537) (Hyd). However, income from other heads would be computed separately.” Madhucon Projects Limited

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

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

depreciation. Further, we make it clear that once the income of the assessee is estimated there cannot by an further addition on any account under the head 'income from business' as held by the co-ordinate Bench in the case of Vishal Infrastructure Ltd., (104 ITD 537) (Hyd). However, income from other heads would be computed separately.” Madhucon Projects Limited

KISAN,NIZAMABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-1, NIZAMABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section 32 of the Act, the term ‘ownership’ must be assigned a wider meaning. A person, who, is in possession of property and uses the assets for his business can be regarded as owner for claiming depreciation. Further, the word ‘owner’ should not necessarily confined to title ownership, but the beneficial ownership and possession are sufficient. Thus, beneficial ownership

HETERO LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.312 & 313/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Hetero Labs Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income Tax, Central Circle – 3(4), Pan : Aaach5506R Hyderabad. अपीलाथ" / Appellant "" यथ" / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.348 & 349/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2-18-19) The Assistant Vs. Hetero Labs Limited, Commissioner Of Income Hyderabad. Tax, Central Circle – 3(4), Pan : Aaach5506R Hyderabad. अपीलाथ" / Appellant "" यथ" / Respondent

350/- under the normal provisions and admitted an income of Rs.336,89,42,640/- as per the provisions of section 115JB. The return was processed u/s 143(1) on 21-02-2020. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire were issued and served

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), HYDERABAD vs. HETERO LABS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.312 & 313/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Hetero Labs Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income Tax, Central Circle – 3(4), Pan : Aaach5506R Hyderabad. अपीलाथ" / Appellant "" यथ" / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.348 & 349/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2-18-19) The Assistant Vs. Hetero Labs Limited, Commissioner Of Income Hyderabad. Tax, Central Circle – 3(4), Pan : Aaach5506R Hyderabad. अपीलाथ" / Appellant "" यथ" / Respondent

350/- under the normal provisions and admitted an income of Rs.336,89,42,640/- as per the provisions of section 115JB. The return was processed u/s 143(1) on 21-02-2020. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire were issued and served

HETERO LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.312 & 313/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Hetero Labs Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income Tax, Central Circle – 3(4), Pan : Aaach5506R Hyderabad. अपीलाथ" / Appellant "" यथ" / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.348 & 349/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2-18-19) The Assistant Vs. Hetero Labs Limited, Commissioner Of Income Hyderabad. Tax, Central Circle – 3(4), Pan : Aaach5506R Hyderabad. अपीलाथ" / Appellant "" यथ" / Respondent

350/- under the normal provisions and admitted an income of Rs.336,89,42,640/- as per the provisions of section 115JB. The return was processed u/s 143(1) on 21-02-2020. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire were issued and served

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. HETERO LABS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.312 & 313/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Hetero Labs Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income Tax, Central Circle – 3(4), Pan : Aaach5506R Hyderabad. अपीलाथ" / Appellant "" यथ" / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.348 & 349/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2-18-19) The Assistant Vs. Hetero Labs Limited, Commissioner Of Income Hyderabad. Tax, Central Circle – 3(4), Pan : Aaach5506R Hyderabad. अपीलाथ" / Appellant "" यथ" / Respondent

350/- under the normal provisions and admitted an income of Rs.336,89,42,640/- as per the provisions of section 115JB. The return was processed u/s 143(1) on 21-02-2020. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire were issued and served

MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result. appeal of the Assessee is partly\nallowed for statistical purposes and appeal of Revenue is\npartly allowed for statistical purposes

section 35(2AB) of the Act and disallowance u/se.14A\nof the Act.\n8.\nAggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the\nappellant company and the Revenue are now in appeal\nbefore the Tribunal.\n9.\nThe first issue that came-up for consideration\nfrom grounds of appeal of the appellant company is, TP\nadjustment in respect of sale

SAI LIFE SCIENCES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 M/S.Sai Life Sciences Ltd Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaecs6143F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ashik Shah, Ca Revenue By: Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Cit(Dr)

350 ITR 527, submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that the lessor is the real owner of the asset and not the lessee and thereby the lessor is eligible to claim depreciation on the leased assets. He submitted that since the assessee in the instant case is a lessee therefore, the right

DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. M/S. ARAGEN LIFE SCIENCES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.639/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Dy. Cit Vs. M/S. Aragen Life Sciences Ltd Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabcg3208J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sp Chidambaram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Narender Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/07/2025 आदेश/Order

depreciation which have been adopted for preparing such accounts including statement of profit and loss for such financial year or part of such financial year falling within the relevant previous year. Page 8 of 14 ITA No 639 of 2025 Aragen Life Sciences Ltd Explanation 1.—For the purposes of this section, "book profit" means the profit as shown

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 :

350/-. The case was selected for scrutiny by issuing notice u/s. 143(2) dated 28.02.2015. Subsequently, notice u/s. 142(1) and letters were issued on various dates. In response, AR appeared and furnished the details called for. After examination of the details so furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer had made the disallowance of expenditure

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

350 to ITR 480 (SC). 11. Sri Gurpreet Singh, Learned DR for the Revenue, on the other hand, supporting the order of the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) submitted that, Lokpriya book containing 381 pages found during the course of survey clearly shows unaccounted land transactions of the assessee. Sri B. Sriramulu employee of the assessee very categorically explained

SKANDA BUILDERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Sections 132(4A) and\n292C of the Income Tax Act create a rebuttable presumption that documents\nfound during a search belong to the assessee and are true. Courts have\nconsistently held that selective reliance on seized material is unjustified\nunless the contents are independently proved against the\n\nITA.Nos.514 to 539/Hyd./2025,\nAnd ITA.Nos.308 to 311/Hyd./2025