PRABHAKAR REDDY BASIREDDY, NALGONDA vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1) , HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

disallowed the assessee’s claim for deduction under section 80C of the Act of Rs. 66,982/-. 6. Accordingly, the AO vide his order under section 147 of the Act, dated 26/03/2025, determined the income of the assessee at Rs. 8,35,157/-. 7. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but without success

PRABHAKAR REDDY BASIREDDY, NALGONDA vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

disallowed the assessee’s claim for deduction under section 80C of the Act of Rs. 66,982/-. 6. Accordingly, the AO vide his order under section 147 of the Act, dated 26/03/2025, determined the income of the assessee at Rs. 8,35,157/-. 7. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but without success

RASHID HUSSAIN,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

1), Hyderabad issued notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 29/11/2023. In compliance, the assessee filed his return of income on 4 Rashid Hussain vs. ACIT 16/01/2025 declaring an income of Rs.19,20,130/-. As the return of income filed by the assessee in compliance to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act was beyond the stipulated

KAUSALYA AGRO FARMS AMD DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of our above findings

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

B’ Bench, Hyderabad श्री विजय पाल राि, उपाध् यक्ष एिं श्री मिुसूदन सािडिया, लेखा सदस् य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.804/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-17) M/s. Kausalya Agro Farms and Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-2(1), Hyderabad. Developers Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad

BRIJESH CHANDWANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE -6(1), HYDERABAD

disallowing the short term capital loss of an amount being Rs.35,39,35,330/-, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 9. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in arriving at the unit loss of Rs. 1,53,71,792/-, and recalculating the short term capital gain, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. The Appellant

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. NARASIMHA REDDY DUTHALA, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

144 taxmann.com\n127) (Mumbai - Trib.) has held that where Assessing Officer\ndenied exemption under section 54F(1), holding that assessee\nwas owner of two residential properties at time of transfer of\noriginal asset, since one property was under construction and\nincome from said property was not chargeable under head\n\"Income from house property\" till time of possession, therefore,\ncondition

BRIJESH CHANDWANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE -6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2020-2021 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1527 & 1528/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years – 2016-2017 & 2020-2021 Brijesh Chandwani The Dcit, Circle-6(1), Vs. Hyderabad – 500 034 Hyderabad. Pan Adkpc1537H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Pawan Kumar Chakrapani राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Ar

disallowing the short term capital loss of an amount being Rs.35,39,35,330/-, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 9. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in arriving at the unit loss of Rs. 1,53,71,792/-, and recalculating the short term capital gain, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. The Appellant

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

144 was issued, questioning why this should not be treated as non- application of income. The assessee contended that similar expenses were allowed in its case for A.Y. 2005-06 by the 3 LD.CIT(A) and that such expenditure was necessary to fulfill its objective of export promotion, benefiting Indian industries. It also argued that Section 11(1)(a) does

SKANDA INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

B” BENCH: HYDERABAD\nBEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT\nAND\nSHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\n\nSl.\nNo.\nI.T.A.No.\nName of\nAppellant\nName of\nRespondent\nA.Y.\nAppealed\nagainst the\nOrder of the\nCIT(A)-12,\nHyderabad\nDated\n1.\n514/Hyd./2025\nSkanda Infra\nProjects India\nPrivate\nLimited,\nKURNOOL.\nPIN – 518 002\nAndhra\nPradesh\nPAN AAOCS8382G\nThe ACIT,\nCentral Circle

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

SKANDHANSHI DEVELOPERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

B” BENCH: HYDERABAD\nBEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\n\nSl. No. I.T.A.No. Name of Appellant Name of Respondent A.Y. Appealed against the Order of the CIT(A)-12, Hyderabad Dated\n1. 514/Hyd./2025 Skanda Infra Projects India Private Limited, KURNOOL. PIN – 518 002 Andhra Pradesh PAN AAOCS8382G The ACIT, Central Circle

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

section 4B of Act 1993. The amendment further\nstates that, in the A.P. Excise Act, 1968, sec.23A and\nsec.23B shall be omitted.\n3.1.\nFor the assessment years 2014-2015 and 2015-\n2016, assessment was originally completed u/sec.143(3)\nvide order dated 30.12.2016. During the course of\nassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed\nthat, there is P & L A/c, to which

SKANDA INFRA PROJECTS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

B +D)\n12,74,11,754/-(F)\nPercentage of Overall Profit\n9.40% (F/(E))%\nPercentage of Net profit as per return filed u/s.139(1)\n8.00% (B/A)%\nPercentage of additional income admitted to the additional\nturnover\n10.47%(D/C)%\n8.4. The assessee is not in a position to substantiate its claim of expenses\nby producing supporting vouchers and other documentary evidences

SHIVA RANJANI VEJJA ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-12(2) , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

b), which as observed in S.S. Ahluwalia (supra) would negate and reject arguments predicated on lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Where an assessee questions jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer within the time limit and in terms of sub-section (3), and the Assessing Officer is not satisfied with the correctness of the claim, he is required to refer the matter

SANGHI TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERBAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

B’ Bench, Hyderabad "ी रवीश सूद, माननीय "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मधुसूदन साव"डया, माननीय लेखा सद"य SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1311/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2014-15) Sanghi Textiles Private VS. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-3(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN: AADCS0837P (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ

SKANDHANSHI DEVELOPERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

B” BENCH: HYDERABAD\nBEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\n\n| Sl. No. | I.T.A.No. | Name of Appellant | Name of Respondent | A.Y. | Appealed against the Order of the CIT(A)-12, Hyderabad Dated |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 1. | 514/Hyd./2025 | Skanda Infra Projects India Private Limited, KURNOOL. PIN – 518 002 Andhra Pradesh PAN AAOCS8382G | The ACIT

SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

B” BENCH: HYDERABAD\nBEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\n\n| Sl. No. | I.T.A.No. | Name of Appellant |\n|---|---|---|\n| 1. | 514/Hyd./2025 | Skanda Infra Projects India Private Limited, KURNOOL. PIN – 518 002 Andhra Pradesh PAN AAOCS8382G |\n| 2. | 515/Hyd./2025 | |\n| 3. | 516/Hyd./2025 | |\n| 4. | 517/Hyd./2025 | |\n| 5. | 518/Hyd./2025 | Skandhanshi

NTT DATA BUSINESS SOLUTIOS PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.489/Hyd/2022 Assessment Year 2018-2019 Ntt Data Business The Dcit, Solutions Private Limited, Hyderabad. Circle-5(1), Vs. Pin -500081. Hyderabad. Pan Aadci1557Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Aliasgar Rampurawala राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

disallowing the relief claimed by the Appellant of INR 31,48,038 towards foreign tax credits under section 90/91 of the Act, without considering assessee's submission and documentary evidence. 19. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in disregarding Assessee's claim for additional relief

DR. REDDYS, LABORATORIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.490 & 491/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Dr. Reddy’S Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad. The Acit, Vs. Pin – 500 034. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – Telangana. 500 084. Pan Aaacd7999Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Padamchand Khincha राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

disallowing 50% of the expenditure, despite TPO accepting similar expenditure to be at arm's length to the extent of its actual cost in subsequent assessment year (AY 2022-23) 5. The lower authorities have erred in making an adjustment towards interest on loans advanced to subsidiaries despite the fact that, under the terms of the loan agreement, no interest