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

section 80IA. The AO, therefore, disallowed the claim of deduction to the tune 4 Tracks & Towers Infratech Pvt.Ltd. (Part IX) of Rs. 12,60,23,062/- under 80IA of the Act claimed in the revised return and made addition of the same to the total income of the assessee. 6. The AO further made addition

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

disallowed the claim of deduction, inter-alia, on the ground that a claim not made in the original return filed under Section 139(1) and sought to be made for the first time in a return filed pursuant to a notice under Section 153A of the Act would not be maintainable. Further, the assessee was also found to be ineligible

PATEL SEW JOINT VENTURE,TELANGANA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

disallowance of deduction claimed under Section 80-IA(4) of the Act, on the ground that, the assessee is not entitled to claim deduction under Section 80-IA(4) of the 6 ITA No.884/Hyd/2025 & ITA 742/Hyd/2025 & C.O.No.17/Hyd/2025 Patel SEW Joint Venture Act, if such claim is not made in the original return of income filed under Section 139

ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD vs. PATEL SEW JOINTVENTURE, HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

disallowance of deduction claimed under Section 80-IA(4) of the Act, on the ground that, the assessee is not entitled to claim deduction under Section 80-IA(4) of the 6 ITA No.884/Hyd/2025 & ITA 742/Hyd/2025 & C.O.No.17/Hyd/2025 Patel SEW Joint Venture Act, if such claim is not made in the original return of income filed under Section 139

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

Section 80IA(4)(1) of the Act. This is further\nfortified by the provisions of Section 80IA(4) of the Act and as per the\nproviso, the deduction is allowed to a successor entity in case one\nenterprise developed such infrastructure facility and after\ndevelopment, transfer such infrastructure facility to another Enterprise\nfor the purpose of operating and maintaining

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

In the result appeals filed by the Revenue\nITA

disallowance\nof deduction u/s 801A(4) in terms of provision of section\n80AC, the Id CIT(A) has erred in law in giving her\nfinding that deduction not claimed in original return u/s\n139(1) cannot be denied if claimed pursuant to notice\nu/s 153A.\nii.\nWhether on the facts and circumstances of the case,\nand

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

disallowance\nof deduction u/s 801A(4) in terms of provision of section\n80AC, the Id CIT(A) has erred in law in giving her\nfinding that deduction not claimed in original return u/s\n139(1) cannot be denied if claimed pursuant to notice\nu/s 153A.\nii.\nWhether on the facts and circumstances of the case,\nand

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

Section 80IA(4)(1) of the Act. This is further\nfortified by the provisions of Section 80IA(4) of the Act and as per the\nproviso, the deduction is allowed to a successor entity in case one\nenterprise developed such infrastructure facility and after\ndevelopment, transfer such infrastructure facility to another Enterprise\nfor the purpose of operating and maintaining

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

139(1) of the IT Act, which is necessary to claim deduction.” 4. The grounds raised by the assessee in C.O. No.2/Hyd/2023 read as under : “1. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in objecting the order of ld.CIT(A) granting relief on claim of exemption under section 10AA of the Act, which was disallowed

PONNAPULA SULOCHANA, L/R OF LATE PONNAPULA SANJEEVA PARTHASARATHY,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee for A

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

disallowance of loss claimed while passing order u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act for the AY 2016-17. 7. The Ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that return filed under Section 153A during the AY 2016-17 takes the place of the original return under Section 139, for the purposes of all other provisions

PONAPULA SULOCHANA LR LATE P SANJEEVA PARTHASARATHY,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee for A

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

disallowance of loss claimed while passing order u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act for the AY 2016-17. 7. The Ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that return filed under Section 153A during the AY 2016-17 takes the place of the original return under Section 139, for the purposes of all other provisions

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)

disallowance of loss claimed while passing order u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act for the AY 2016-17. 7. The Ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that return filed under Section 153A during the AY 2016-17 takes the place of the original return under Section 139, for the purposes of all other provisions

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

139, 147, 148, 149 and 153 would give way to the provisions of section 153A of the Act. It was submitted that once the assessee has not claimed the benefit of deduction u/s 80IA in the original return of income, then the same cannot be claimed while filing the return of income in pursuance to the notice issued u/s 153A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

139, 147, 148, 149 and 153 would give way to the provisions of section 153A of the Act. It was submitted that once the assessee has not claimed the benefit of deduction u/s 80IA in the original return of income, then the same cannot be claimed while filing the return of income in pursuance to the notice issued u/s 153A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

139, 147, 148, 149 and 153 would give way to the provisions of section 153A of the Act. It was submitted that once the assessee has not claimed the benefit of deduction u/s 80IA in the original return of income, then the same cannot be claimed while filing the return of income in pursuance to the notice issued u/s 153A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

139, 147, 148, 149 and 153 would give way to the provisions of section 153A of the Act. It was submitted that once the assessee has not claimed the benefit of deduction u/s 80IA in the original return of income, then the same cannot be claimed while filing the return of income in pursuance to the notice issued u/s 153A

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

139(1). Since the assessee is not a power transmission or distribution undertaking, therefore, the Assessing Officer, following the decision of the CIT (A) for the A.Y 2014-15, disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80IA(4)(iv)(b). Since he disallowed the claim of deduction under this section

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

139(1). Since the assessee is not a power transmission or distribution undertaking, therefore, the Assessing Officer, following the decision of the CIT (A) for the A.Y 2014-15, disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80IA(4)(iv)(b). Since he disallowed the claim of deduction under this section

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

139(1). Since the assessee is not a power transmission or distribution undertaking, therefore, the Assessing Officer, following the decision of the CIT (A) for the A.Y 2014-15, disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80IA(4)(iv)(b). Since he disallowed the claim of deduction under this section