ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

disallowance\nof any part of the interest expenditure under section 14A r.w Rule 8D(2)\nwas liable to be made

ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. USHODAYA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

disallowance made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, without appreciating that the Assessing Officer had duly recorded his satisfaction, as mandated by Section 14A(2

PRASAD FILM LABORATORIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under Section 14A read with rule 8D is bad in law, as the Learned Assessing Officer failed to record his dissatisfaction with regard to the correctness of the appellant's claim, as required under Section 14A(2

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

Bench: Us :

disallowing Rs. 15,75,000/-under section 14A of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in making the addition of an amount being Rs. 18,03,62,857/- under section 56[2

ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. USHODAYA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

disallowance\nmade under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, without appreciating that the\nAssessing Officer had duly recorded his satisfaction, as mandated by Section\n14A(2

CHINTALAPATI HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules are applicable to the facts of the case, and proceeded to make addition under 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules and 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules to reach the figure of disallowance

CHINTALAPATI HOLDINGS PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules are applicable to the facts of the case, and proceeded to make addition under 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules and 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules to reach the figure of disallowance

CHINTALAPATI HOLDINGS PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules are applicable to the facts of the case, and proceeded to make addition under 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules and 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules to reach the figure of disallowance

JASPER INDUSTRIES PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

disallowance under Section 14A. Ground No. 9 The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, modify, substitute or delete any of the above grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing. Ground No. 10 The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the A.O. did not record the requisite satisfaction as required under Section 14A(2

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

Section 14A(2) of the Act, read with Rule 8D of the Rules, we also make it clear that before applying the theory of apportionment, the AO needs to record satisfaction that having regard to the kind of the assessee, suo moto disallowance

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of revenue is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

Section 14A(2) of the Act, read with Rule\n8D of the Rules, we also make it clear that before applying the theory of\napportionment, the AO needs to record satisfaction that having regard to the\nkind of the assessee, suo moto disallowance

ANANDA PRASAD VENIGALA,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1384/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Ananda Prasad Venigala, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan:Aewpp1096B (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 31/07/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 06/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Ananda Prasad Venigala (“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 18.11.2024 For The A.Y. 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

disallowance is unjustified because the Ld. AO failed to record proper satisfaction, as required under Section 14A(2), before invoking

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), HYDERABAD vs. BHAGYANAGAR INDIA LIMITED , SECUNDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1200/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-17) Income Tax Officer, M/S. Bhagyanagar India Ward-1(3), Hyderabad. Vs. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan:Aaacb8963C (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Narender Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 24/07/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 08/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M. : This Appeal Is Filed By Revenue, Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 16.05.2019 For The A.Y. 2016-17. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 07.08.2017. The Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act on ITA No.1200/Hyd/2019 3 26.12.2018. While doing so, the Ld. AO made disallowances of Rs.27,464/- under Section 37(1) of the Act, disallowance of Rs.6,09,705/- out of miscellaneous expenditure

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. ENGENRIN HYDRO POWER LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

section 14A r.w.s.8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962, even though the assessee has not earned any dividend income, which is exempt u/s 10(34) of the Act. The Ld.CIT(A), after considering the relevant facts has rightly deleted the additions made by the A.O. Thus, we are inclined to uphold the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. ENGENRIN HYDRO POWER LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

section 14A r.w.s.8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962, even though the assessee has not earned any dividend income, which is exempt u/s 10(34) of the Act. The Ld.CIT(A), after considering the relevant facts has rightly deleted the additions made by the A.O. Thus, we are inclined to uphold the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. ENGENRIN HYDRO POWER LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

section 14A r.w.s.8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962, even though the assessee has not earned any dividend income, which is exempt u/s 10(34) of the Act. The Ld.CIT(A), after considering the relevant facts has rightly deleted the additions made by the A.O. Thus, we are inclined to uphold the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. ENGENRIN HYDRO POWER LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

section 14A r.w.s.8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962, even though the assessee has not earned any dividend income, which is exempt u/s 10(34) of the Act. The Ld.CIT(A), after considering the relevant facts has rightly deleted the additions made by the A.O. Thus, we are inclined to uphold the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal

ASIAN INSTITUTE OF GASTROENTEROLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for\nboth the

disallowance under section 14A read\nwith Rule 8D of I.T. Rules. Therefore, we cannot uphold the\nreasons given by the learned PCIT to set-aside the\nassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer for both\nthe assessment years.\n11.\nThe assessee has relied upon the decision of\nHon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial\nCompany Limited