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 :

disallowance computed under section 14A of the Act pertains to computation of income under the normal provisions of the Act and cannot be read into the provisions of section 115JB of the Act pertaining to levy of minimum alternate tax and there is no express provision in clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB of the Act to that

DURGAMATHA HOUSE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaassessment Year: 2020-21 Durgamatha House Building Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(1), Construction Co-Operative Hyderabad. Housing Society Limited, Hyderabad. Pan : Aacad6852C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar, Advocate Revenue By: Ms. Kavitha Rani, Sr-Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.12.2024

disallowance of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, amounting to Rs. 6,62,116/-. 2. The learned

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

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

Section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The A.O., after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee and also taking note of certain judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Vs. CIT (1979) 116 ITR 1 (SC) disallowed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD vs. PRAGATI GREEN MEADOWS & RESORTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HONBLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HONBLE (Judicial Member)

disallowance of interest of Rs. 87,60,291/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act, by passing a cryptic order without assigning any reasons as to how the loans given by the assessee company to M/s. Pragati Kamadhenu Finance Pvt. Ltd fall under the business advances. The learned counsel for the Revenue referring to the order

REASONING GLOBAL E-APPLICATIONS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2012-13 Reasoning Global E- Vs. Dy. C.I.T. Application Ltd, Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aadcr6701P Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Swapnil Deshmukh, Ca Revenue By: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 07/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/08/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.09.2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-3, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2012-13. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Providing It Enabled Electronic Commerce Services. It Filed Its Return Of Income For The A.Y 2012-13 On 30.09.2012 Declaring Loss Of Rs.9,52,71,232/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Noted That The Assessee Has Debited An Amount Of Rs.1,02,18,116/- Towards Web Hosting Charges. From The Bills/Invoices Produced For The Expenditure So Claimed, The Page 1 Of 19

section 195, the provisions of DTAA between India and US, the Assessing Officer held that the TDS provisions would be applicable to the assessee. Relying on various decisions, the Assessing Officer made disallowance of Rs.1,02,18,116

ANANTAPUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE STAFF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,ANANTAPUR vs. ITO., WARD-1, ANANTAPUR

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

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.आआआ.आआ /Ita No.1142/Hyd/2024 (आआआआआआआआ आआआआ/Assessment Year:2016-17) M/S. Anantapur District Co- Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-1, Anantapur. Operative Staff Co-Operative Society Limited, Anantapur. Pan:Aaeaa0133B (Appellant) (Respondent) आआआआआआआआआआ आआआआआआ/Assessee Dr. D. Harish Chandra Rama, Ca By: आआआआआआ आआआआआआ/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Dr आआआआआआ आआ आआआआआ/Date Of 24/02/2025 Hearing: आआआआआ आआ 04/03/2025 आआआआआ/Pronouncement: आआआआ/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By M/S. Anantapur District Co-Operative Staff Co-Operative Society Limited (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 05.09.2024 For The A.Y. 2016-17. 2. The Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Association Of Persons (“Aop”), Not Filed Any Return Of Income (“Roi”) U/S.139 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ('The Act'). From The Information

116/- was received from nationalized bank. The only question before us is to decide whether the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act or not on receipt of such interest from nationalized bank. The Ld.AR relied on the decision of co-ordinate Bench of ITAT in its own case (supra), wherein the ITAT relied

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

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

116 taxman 184 (Cuttack) Wag.) wherein it was held that deletion of the disallowance based on legal provision cannot be construed to be within the ambit of 'additional evidence' for the purpose of Rule 46A, even though the Assessee files the additional evidence. Further, reference is also drawn to Hon'ble Gauhati ITAT decision CIT Vs. Poddar Swadesh Udyog

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

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

116 taxman 184 (Cuttack) Wag.) wherein it was held that deletion of the disallowance based on legal provision cannot be construed to be within the ambit of 'additional evidence' for the purpose of Rule 46A, even though the Assessee files the additional evidence. Further, reference is also drawn to Hon'ble Gauhati ITAT decision CIT Vs. Poddar Swadesh Udyog

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

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

116 taxman 184 (Cuttack) Wag.) wherein it was held that deletion of the disallowance based on legal provision cannot be construed to be within the ambit of 'additional evidence' for the purpose of Rule 46A, even though the Assessee files the additional evidence. Further, reference is also drawn to Hon'ble Gauhati ITAT decision CIT Vs. Poddar Swadesh Udyog

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

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

116 taxman 184 (Cuttack) Wag.) wherein it was held that deletion of the disallowance based on legal provision cannot be construed to be within the ambit of 'additional evidence' for the purpose of Rule 46A, even though the Assessee files the additional evidence. Further, reference is also drawn to Hon'ble Gauhati ITAT decision CIT Vs. Poddar Swadesh Udyog

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

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

116 taxman 184 (Cuttack) Wag.) wherein it was held that deletion of the disallowance based on legal provision cannot be construed to be within the ambit of 'additional evidence' for the purpose of Rule 46A, even though the Assessee files the additional evidence. Further, reference is also drawn to Hon'ble Gauhati ITAT decision CIT Vs. Poddar Swadesh Udyog

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

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

116 taxman 184 (Cuttack) Wag.) wherein it was held that deletion of the disallowance based on legal provision cannot be construed to be within the ambit of 'additional evidence' for the purpose of Rule 46A, even though the Assessee files the additional evidence. Further, reference is also drawn to Hon'ble Gauhati ITAT decision CIT Vs. Poddar Swadesh Udyog

INVESCO(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2 (1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

disallow the depreciation claimed on goodwill arising on account of amalgamation on the ground that, as per 6th proviso to section 32(1) and Explanation-7 to section 43(1) of the Act, the depreciation to the amalgamated company is allowable only to the extent, as if 22 ITA.No.111/Hyd./2022 such succession or amalgamation has not taken place

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), HYDERABAD vs. ATHENA GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED (FORMERLY M/S VJIL CONSULTING LIMITED), HYDERABAD

In the result, the ground nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

116/- on account of disallowance made towards interest to bank and electricity expenses respectively. Accordingly, the Ld. AO had made addition on account of bank interest twice, i.e. first along with the addition of Rs.1,42,00,284/- on account of non-production of bills / vouchers and secondly, the Ld. AO disallowed Rs.44,12,893/- again u/s.40

ATHENA GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the ground nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

116/- on account of disallowance made towards interest to bank and electricity expenses respectively. Accordingly, the Ld. AO had made addition on account of bank interest twice, i.e. first along with the addition of Rs.1,42,00,284/- on account of non-production of bills / vouchers and secondly, the Ld. AO disallowed Rs.44,12,893/- again u/s.40

XILINX INDIA TECHNOLOGY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the ground nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

116/- on account of disallowance made towards interest to bank and electricity expenses respectively. Accordingly, the Ld. AO had made addition on account of bank interest twice, i.e. first along with the addition of Rs.1,42,00,284/- on account of non-production of bills / vouchers and secondly, the Ld. AO disallowed Rs.44,12,893/- again u/s.40

NSL RENEWABLE POWER PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2014-15 Nsl Renewable Power Pvt. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Circle – 16(1), Pan – Aabcn 6009L Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar Date Of Hearing: 16/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04/01/2022

116/- totalling to Rs. 3,62,71,333/-. According to CIT, as per the provisions of Section 57(iii), the same needs to be expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of earning :- 13 -: ITA No.. 600/Hyd/2019 NSL Renewable Power Pvt. Ltd., Hyd. such income. Hence the expenditure claimed on account of interest payments amounting to Rs.3,62,71/333

SPANDANA SPHOORTY FINANCIAL LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE 3(2), HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the addition of Rs.11,44,51,818/- (supra) made by the\nAO, which, thereafter, had been sustained by the CIT(A), is vacated.\nThe Grounds of appeal Nos.3.1 to 3.4 are allowed in terms o...

116(a). The CBDT\nunder this section is empowered to issue such orders instructions and\ndirections to other income-tax authorities \"as it may deem fit for proper\nadministration of this Act\". Such authorities and all other persons\nemployed in the execution of this Act are bound to observe and\nfollow such orders, instructions and directions of the CBDT