SRICHARAN DEVINENI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

disallowing the deduction claimed\nunder section 80D of the Act. Accordingly, the assessment was completed by\nthe Ld. AO under section 143(3) of the Act on 19.03.2025, determining the total\nincome of the assessee at Rs. 1,74,37,030/-.\n6.\nAggrieved with the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee filed an appeal\nbefore the Ld. Commissioner

ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCC HES JV, MADHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

disallowed. Thereafter, assessee furnished his reply. After verification of the submissions made by the assessee, Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act 4 NCC HES JV, Madhapur dt.30.12.2019, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.11,56,60,835/-. 5. Feeling aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, assessee filed appeal before the LD.CIT

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang, Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

132 of the Act and the consequent assessment proceedings under Section 153A of the Act, because the provisions of Section 153A of the Act are akin to the provisions of Section 147 of the Act and thus, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd. (supra), reassessment proceedings under

NAGALAKSHMI DEVINENI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia(In आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1559/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year:2023-24) Nagalakshmi Devineni, Vs. Dcit, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(2), Pan: Afnpd6112N Hyderabad. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) (In आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1563/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year:2021-22) Sri Venkat Devineni, Vs. Dcit, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(2), Pan: Alipd6384R Hyderabad. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) (In आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1573/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year:2022-23) Sricharan Devineni, Vs. Dcit, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(2), Pan: Bgjpd6383B Hyderabad. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) करदाताका""त"न"ध"व/ : Shri H. Srinivasulu, Advocate Assessee Represented By राज"वका""त"न"ध"व/ : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar Department Represented By

disallowing the deduction claimed under section 80D of the Act. Accordingly, the assessment was completed by the Ld. AO under section 143(3) of the Act on 19.03.2025, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,74,37,030/-. 6. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

4) of the Act, for the first time, in the return of income\nfiled in response to the notice issued under Section 153A of\nthe Act, in pursuant to search and seizure operation\nconducted under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\nTherefore, to answer the questions referred to, this Special\nBench, it is necessary to understand the provisions

SABIR , SEW & PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

disallowances\nmade during the assessment process. The legislative intent\nof Section 80IA of the Act is to incentivize infrastructure\ndevelopment and industrial growth by providing deductions on\nincome attributable to eligible undertakings. This objective is best\nachieved by allowing deductions on the income computed as per\nthe final assessment, which captures the true profits of the eligible\nbusiness

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), HYDERBAD vs. SEW INFRASTUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

4) of the Act, for the first time, in the return of income\nfiled in response to the notice issued under Section 153A of\nthe Act, in pursuant to search and seizure operation\nconducted under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\nTherefore, to answer the questions referred to, this Special\nBench, it is necessary to understand the provisions

SABIR, SEW 7 PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

disallowances\nmade during the assessment process. The legislative intent\nof Section 80IA of the Act is to incentivize infrastructure\ndevelopment and industrial growth by providing deductions on\nincome attributable to eligible undertakings. This objective is best\nachieved by allowing deductions on the income computed as per\nthe final assessment, which captures the true profits of the eligible\nbusiness

SABIR, SEW & PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

disallowances\nmade during the assessment process. The legislative intent\nof Section 80IA of the Act is to incentivize infrastructure\ndevelopment and industrial growth by providing deductions on\nincome attributable to eligible undertakings. This objective is best\nachieved by allowing deductions on the income computed as per\nthe final assessment, which captures the true profits of the eligible\nbusiness

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

In the result appeals filed by the Revenue\nITA

4) of the Act, for the first time, in the return of income\nfiled in response to the notice issued under Section 153A of\nthe Act, in pursuant to search and seizure operation\nconducted under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\nTherefore, to answer the questions referred to, this Special\nBench, it is necessary to understand the provisions

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

4) of the Act, for the first time, in the return of income\nfiled in response to the notice issued under Section 153A of\nthe Act, in pursuant to search and seizure operation\nconducted under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\nTherefore, to answer the questions referred to, this Special\nBench, it is necessary to understand the provisions

ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCC HES JV, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

disallowances.\nAccordingly, the AO is directed to recompute the Section 80IA deduction\non the final assessed income of the eligible industrial undertaking. This\nensures that the deduction accurately reflects the undertaking's profits,\nconsistent with statutory provisions and judicial interpretations.\n17. The assessee's respective grounds in ITA No.1749/Ahd/2016 for AY\n2012-13 are allowed.\"\n16.\nThe co-ordinate Bench

C5 INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED,SECUNDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.332/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) C5 Infra (P) Ltd Vs. Acit Secunderabad Central Circle 2(3) Pan:Aafcc2138K Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca Shri C. Maheshwar Reddy, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Narender Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10/03/2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-12, Hyderabad, For The A.Y.2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

132 i.e. 7/1/2021. The learned Counsel for the assessee has referred to the details as recorded in the excel sheets found during the course of search from the email ID of Shri B. Veeranjaneyulu, Sr. Accountant and submitted that all these entries as part of the excel sheets are duly recorded in the books of account of 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 of Rs.59,03,406/- on a/c of bank guarantee commission. We find a search took place u/s 132 of the I.T. Act on 2.11.2017 in the case of the assessee and in response to notice u/s 153A, the assessee filed its return of income on 3.3.2018 declaring total income of Rs.8,22,37,650/- after claiming deduction u/s 80IA

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 of Rs.59,03,406/- on a/c of bank guarantee commission. We find a search took place u/s 132 of the I.T. Act on 2.11.2017 in the case of the assessee and in response to notice u/s 153A, the assessee filed its return of income on 3.3.2018 declaring total income of Rs.8,22,37,650/- after claiming deduction u/s 80IA

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 of Rs.59,03,406/- on a/c of bank guarantee commission. We find a search took place u/s 132 of the I.T. Act on 2.11.2017 in the case of the assessee and in response to notice u/s 153A, the assessee filed its return of income on 3.3.2018 declaring total income of Rs.8,22,37,650/- after claiming deduction u/s 80IA

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 of Rs.59,03,406/- on a/c of bank guarantee commission. We find a search took place u/s 132 of the I.T. Act on 2.11.2017 in the case of the assessee and in response to notice u/s 153A, the assessee filed its return of income on 3.3.2018 declaring total income of Rs.8,22,37,650/- after claiming deduction u/s 80IA

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 of Rs.59,03,406/- on a/c of bank guarantee commission. We find a search took place u/s 132 of the I.T. Act on 2.11.2017 in the case of the assessee and in response to notice u/s 153A, the assessee filed its return of income on 3.3.2018 declaring total income of Rs.8,22,37,650/- after claiming deduction u/s 80IA