DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. TKR EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. Tkr Educational Society, Of Income Tax, 16-2-751/A/31/Ctirumala (Exemptions), Hills, Malakpet, Hyderabad. Hyderabad, Telangana – 500036. Pan : Aaaat7850Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri M. Vijay Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.03.2024

10(23)(C)(vi) have not been uploaded in the software and therefore, disallowance was made by the CPC/Assessing Officer. Before the assessee’s application u/s 154 could have been adjudicated, the assessee had preferred the appeal before the ld.CIT(A) and also produced the copy of corrected copy of ITR-7 wherein the correct figures of exempt income were

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

10, section 10A[, section 10AA], clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, section 44AB [, section 44DA, section 50B], section 80-IA, section 80-IB, section 80-IC, section 80-ID, section 80JJAA, section 80LA, section 92E, [section 115JB, 5[section 115JC] or section 115VW] [or to give a notice under clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. HSBC ELECTRONIC DATA PROCESSING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

c) to section 115JB of the Act, only provisions in the nature of ascertained liability can only be deducted for the purpose of calculation of book profit. In our opinion the provisions for doubtful debts amounting to Rs.11,29,70,000/-created by the assessee should not be deducted for the purpose of computation of the book profits u/s 115JB

ANDHRA PRADESH BEVERAGES CORPORATION LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

10,39,064\n\nThe above additions/disallowance made are erroneous\nand the CIT (A) erred in confirming the additions/\ndisallowance without appreciating the submissions put\nforth by the appellant.\n\n5. The learned CIT(A) erred in ignoring the objections filed\nonline on 29/3/2023 and also the petition filed for\nadmission of additional grounds.\n\n6. The learned

ANDHRA PRADESH BEVERAGES CORPORATION LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

10,39,064\nThe above additions/disallowance made are erroneous\nand the CIT (A) erred in confirming the additions/\ndisallowance without appreciating the submissions put\nforth by the appellant.\n5. The learned CIT(A) erred in ignoring the objections filed\nonline on 29/3/2023 and also the petition filed for\nadmission of additional grounds.\n6. The learned CIT(A) erred in concurring

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. GVPR ENGINEERS LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result all the 5 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowance as part of the gross total income while computing the deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961”. 16. The Revenue in ITA No.750/Hyd/2020 for the A.Y 2014-15 has raised the following grounds: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts of the case in allowing relief to the assessee

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. GVPR ENGINEERS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result all the 5 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowance as part of the gross total income while computing the deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961”. 16. The Revenue in ITA No.750/Hyd/2020 for the A.Y 2014-15 has raised the following grounds: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts of the case in allowing relief to the assessee

GVPR ENGINEERS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result all the 5 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowance as part of the gross total income while computing the deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961”. 16. The Revenue in ITA No.750/Hyd/2020 for the A.Y 2014-15 has raised the following grounds: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts of the case in allowing relief to the assessee

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. CHINTHAKUNTA RAMESH SRIDEVI, HYDERABAD

In the result all the 5 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowance as part of the gross total income while computing the deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961”. 16. The Revenue in ITA No.750/Hyd/2020 for the A.Y 2014-15 has raised the following grounds: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts of the case in allowing relief to the assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD vs. GVPR ENGINEERS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result all the 5 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowance as part of the gross total income while computing the deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961”. 16. The Revenue in ITA No.750/Hyd/2020 for the A.Y 2014-15 has raised the following grounds: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts of the case in allowing relief to the assessee

GVPR ENGINEERS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CC-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result all the 5 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowance as part of the gross total income while computing the deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961”. 16. The Revenue in ITA No.750/Hyd/2020 for the A.Y 2014-15 has raised the following grounds: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts of the case in allowing relief to the assessee

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD vs. GVPR ENGINEERS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result all the 5 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowance as part of the gross total income while computing the deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961”. 16. The Revenue in ITA No.750/Hyd/2020 for the A.Y 2014-15 has raised the following grounds: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts of the case in allowing relief to the assessee

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD vs. GVPR ENGINEERS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result all the 5 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowance as part of the gross total income while computing the deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961”. 16. The Revenue in ITA No.750/Hyd/2020 for the A.Y 2014-15 has raised the following grounds: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts of the case in allowing relief to the assessee

GVPR ENGINEERS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1(3) , HYDERABAD

In the result all the 5 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowance as part of the gross total income while computing the deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961”. 16. The Revenue in ITA No.750/Hyd/2020 for the A.Y 2014-15 has raised the following grounds: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts of the case in allowing relief to the assessee

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

23,01,307/- towards disallowance of claim of 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 with the order of Ld. AO, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 04. Aggrieved with

THERMODYNE DYNAMICS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -17(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us :

disallowance under Section 14A: Rs.15,75,000/-; and (ii). addition u/s 56(2)(viia) : Rs.18,03,62,857/-. In compliance, the A.O. filed his “remand report” on 10.01.2020. Thereafter, the CIT(A) finding no infirmity in the addition/disallowance made by the A.O. upheld the same. 8. The assessee company being aggrieved with the order of CIT(A) has carried

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. VAMSI MOHAN VALLABHANENI, VIJAYAWADA

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaassessment Year: 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Sri Vamsi Mohan Vallabhaneni, Tax, R/O.Vijayawada. Central Circle – 3(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Adrpv4231C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. M. Narmadha, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.12.2024 10.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement:

disallowance of deduction claimed under sections 10AA, 80- IA, 80-IAB, 80-IB, 80-IC, 80-ID or section 80-IE, if the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub- section (1) of section 139; or (vi) addition of income appearing in Form 26AS or Form 16A or Form 16 which has not been included in computing

ACIT., EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. PHARMACEUTICALS EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL OF INDIA, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. Pharmaceuticals Export Of Income Tax, Promotion Council Of India, Exemptions, Circle – 1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aadcp4643C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rv. Chalam, C.A. Revenue By: Shri B. Balakrishna, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.02.2025

c) qualified the word "applied" appearing in these provisions and not the words "said purposes." 8. Thus, it is well settled law that the expenditure incurred by the trust outside India cannot be considered as application of income as per Section 11(1)(a) of the Act. Therefore in the present case, the disallowance of Rs. 10,15,818/- which