SHRI GAYATRI CONSTRUCTIONS,NELLORE vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, NELLORE

In the result, the appeal of assessee for A

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)

carry forward loss in the AY 2017-18, without making Fa any specific disallowance of loss claimed while passing order

ROCKSALT INTERACTIVE GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2) , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarm/S. Rocksalt Interactive Income Tax Officer, Vs. Games Pvt. Ltd., Ward 3(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan Aafcr3033A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. Respondent By : Shri Vijay Bhaskar Reddy, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.12.2022 O R D E R Per Shri Laliet Kumar, J.M. : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dt.30.03.2020 Of The Learned Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax/Cit-3, Hyderabad Relating To Assessment Year 2015-16 U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’).

carried forward, AO initiated proceeding u/s 154 of the Act and ultimately passed the order disallowing the set off of brought forward loss

NEOTISS PRIVATE LIMITED,MEDAK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 8(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.436/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Neotiss Private Limited Vs. Acit Medak Circle-8(1) Pan : Aaacc8221G Hyderabad

carry forward of losses is restricted as per the assessed losses in the previous years as per the order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act. 5. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee challenged the additions made by the AO towards disallowance

JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD), CENTRAL CIRLCE -1(2) , HYDERABAD vs. AMSRI BUILDERS, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

forward. The AO has disallowed current year’s entire loss and he has not given set off of loss of the current year from the other heads of income. During the course of hearing, the ld. DR vehemently supported the order of AO and the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that current year’s loss has not been carried

JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD), CENTRAL CIRLCE -1(2) , HYDERABAD vs. AMSRI BUILDERS, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

forward. The AO has disallowed current year’s entire loss and he has not given set off of loss of the current year from the other heads of income. During the course of hearing, the ld. DR vehemently supported the order of AO and the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that current year’s loss has not been carried

SUNSHINE GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 61/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Sunshine Granites Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Karimnagar Central Circle-1(2), [Pan No. Aaocs6148Q] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध / Assessee By: Shri A. Srinivas, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध / Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement On: 13/02/2024

carried forward losses cannot be allowed to be set off against the profits of the company in subsequent years. 5. Learned Assessing Officer, pursuant to the orders of the PCIT under section 263 of the Act, disallowed

SUDHAKAR REDDY NALLA,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed accordingly

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.233/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

carried forward losses for the A.Y.2017-18 and if so to delete the disallowance of set off of carried forward losses

STARS MULTIPURPOSE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं/Ita No. 13/Hyd/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Stars Multipurpose Vs. Deputy Commissioner Co-Operative Society Of Income Tax, Limited, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan No. Aakas6153R] अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत् यर्थी/Respondent नििााररती द्वारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ar राजस् व द्वारा/Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Dr सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 29/04/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement On: 30/04/2024 आदेश / Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23/11/2023 Passed By The Learned Addl/Jcit(A)-4, Mumbai, (“Ld. First Appellate Authority”), Relating To The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Co- Operative Society, Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 29/10/2018 Admitting ‘Nil’ Income. The Cpc Bengaluru (“Cpc”) In The Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act,1961(“ The Act”), Dated 22/10/2019 Disallowed The Provident Fund Payment & Esi Fund Payment Of Rs. 14,56,847/- On The Reason That The Said Payments Are Not Allowable U/S. 36(1)(Va) Of The Act & Determined The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs. 14,56,847/- & Finally Raised A Demand Of Rs.5,59,053/-.

carried forward under this section for more than eight assessment years immediately succeeding the assessment year for which the loss was first computed.” 11.2. From a perusal of provisions of Section 72 of the Act reproduced above, in our opinion, the assessee is eligible for set off of additional income resulted on account of disallowances

DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. DBS TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Dbs Technology Income Tax, Services India Private Circle – 8(1), Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aafcd5584N (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No.2/Hyd/2023 Assessment Year 2019-20 Dbs Technology Services India Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Circle – 8(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aafcd5584N (Cross Objector / (Appellant/Revenue) Respondent) Assessee By: Sri M. P. Lohia, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.07.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, Jm: The Appeal & Cross-Objection Filed By The Revenue For A.Y. 2019-20 Arise From The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi

carried forward or set- off of any loss. Filing a revised return under Section 139(5) of the IT Act and taking a contrary stand and/or claiming the exemption, which was specifically not claimed earlier while filing the original return of income is not permissible. By filing the revised return of income, the assessee cannot be permitted to substitute

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. SEMBMARINE KAKINANDA LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

disallowed the claim of the assessee to set off or carry forward the business losses of earlier years. Accordingly the learned

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. TRACKS & TOWERS INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED(PART IX), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

carry forward of losses by filing a revised return of income. 22) Supreme Court held that S. 1 OB (8) of the Act requires exercise of the option within the period prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act and such time limit is mandatory. The relevant extract of the Supreme Court decision is also reproduced below; “9. Therefore, claiming benefit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. TRACKS & TOWERS INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED(PART IX), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

carry forward of losses by filing a revised return of income. 22) Supreme Court held that S. 1 OB (8) of the Act requires exercise of the option within the period prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act and such time limit is mandatory. The relevant extract of the Supreme Court decision is also reproduced below; “9. Therefore, claiming benefit

COUNTRY CLUB HOSPITALITY & HOLIDAYS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

carried over to the following years account in a continuing business are not brought to the charge as a matter of practice, though, as stated above, loss due to fall in the price below cost is allowed even though such loss has not been realized actually. At this stage, we need to emphasise once again that the above system

ASTER RAIL PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

carried forward in the case of changes in the shareholding but not the current year losses. Ld. CIT(A), however, observed that the entire process of transition was complete during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014- 15 and, therefore, the stand taken by the learned Assessing Officer in making disallowance

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. LAHARI HOLIDAY HOMES (P) LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, in terms of our above observation

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.600/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2021-22) Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. Lahari Holiday Homes Income Tax, Circle 5(1), Vs. (P) Ltd., Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aaacl8925C (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri J J Varun, C.A. राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 08/10/2025

carried-forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation, the Ld. AR pointed out that the assessee had not claimed any deduction under section 32(1)(iia), 32AD, 35, 35CCC, 35CCD, or Chapter VI-A (other than 80JJAA/80M) of the Act. The brought-forward business loss and capital loss were regular in nature, not attributable to any disallowed

ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.552/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Ascend Telecom Income Tax, Central Circle Infrastructure (P) Ltd 3(2), Hyderabad Secunderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.539/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Ascend Telecom Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Infrastructure (P) Ltd Income Tax, Central Secunderabad Circle 3(2), Hyderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.R. Vasudevan राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. T Vijayalakshmi, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 05/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Are Cross Appeals Filed By Both The Assessee As Well As The Revenue For The A.Y 2010-11 Against The Common Order Dated 31/07/2020 Of The Learned Cit (A) 11 Hyderabad.

Disallowance of brought forward losses of Amalgamating Company for AY 2008-09 invoking section 72A of the Act during AY 2010-11 Rs. 5,28,91,316 a) The learned CIT(A) and the learned AO erred in law and on facts in not allowing carry

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED , SECUNDERABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.552/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Ascend Telecom Income Tax, Central Circle Infrastructure (P) Ltd 3(2), Hyderabad Secunderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.539/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Ascend Telecom Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Infrastructure (P) Ltd Income Tax, Central Secunderabad Circle 3(2), Hyderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.R. Vasudevan राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. T Vijayalakshmi, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 05/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Are Cross Appeals Filed By Both The Assessee As Well As The Revenue For The A.Y 2010-11 Against The Common Order Dated 31/07/2020 Of The Learned Cit (A) 11 Hyderabad.

Disallowance of brought forward losses of Amalgamating Company for AY 2008-09 invoking section 72A of the Act during AY 2010-11 Rs. 5,28,91,316 a) The learned CIT(A) and the learned AO erred in law and on facts in not allowing carry

RAGHU RAMA RENEWABLE ENERGY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

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

carrying stock-in-trade in the form of biomass products and coal, which is the main raw material for generation of electricity through biomass-based power generation plant. The assessee has claimed impairment loss of Rs. 2,40,16,579/- and debited the same to the profit and loss account and claimed that, it has valued its closing stock