BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

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

disallowance of ‘site expenses’ of Rs. 44,24,840/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS under Section 194C of the Act. 56. In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2019-20 is partly allowed. 57. To sum up, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed. Order pronounced

DY.CIT, CIR-1(2), HYDERABAD vs. M/S CUNTRY CLUB (I) LIMITED,, HYDERABAD

In the result, the grounds of the appeal of the assessee on this issue are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Country Club Vs. Asst. Cit, Circle-1(2), Hospitality & Holidays Ltd., Hyderabad. (Formerly Known As Country Club India Ltd.,) Hyderabad.

194C are not applicable to payments made of Rs. 52,50,500/- towards printing & stationery . 38. The Ld AO erred in provoking the provisions of section 40(a) (ia) without appreciating the fact that payments made are not covered by provisions of chapter XVII-B of the Act. 39. The Ld. AO ought to have appreciated the fact that

M/S. COUNTRY CLUB INDIA LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the grounds of the appeal of the assessee on this issue are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Country Club Vs. Asst. Cit, Circle-1(2), Hospitality & Holidays Ltd., Hyderabad. (Formerly Known As Country Club India Ltd.,) Hyderabad.

194C are not applicable to payments made of Rs. 52,50,500/- towards printing & stationery . 38. The Ld AO erred in provoking the provisions of section 40(a) (ia) without appreciating the fact that payments made are not covered by provisions of chapter XVII-B of the Act. 39. The Ld. AO ought to have appreciated the fact that

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD vs. M/S. COUNTRY CLUB (I) LTD,, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmancountry Club Hospitality & Vs Addl. Cit, Range-1 Holidays Ltd Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aaacc 9376 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Commissioner Of Country Club Hospitality & Income Tax, Circle 1(2) Vs Holidays Ltd Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aaacc 9376 B (Appellant) (Respondent)

194C are not applicable to payments made of Rs. 3,57,069/- towards Programme Expenses Payable. 22. The Ld AO ought to have appreciated that the provisions of section 194J are not applicable to payments made of Rs. 3,00,000/ - towards Audit fee. 23. The Ld AO erred in provoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) without appreciating

M/S COUNTRY CLUB (INDIA) LTD,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmancountry Club Hospitality & Vs Addl. Cit, Range-1 Holidays Ltd Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aaacc 9376 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Commissioner Of Country Club Hospitality & Income Tax, Circle 1(2) Vs Holidays Ltd Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aaacc 9376 B (Appellant) (Respondent)

194C are not applicable to payments made of Rs. 3,57,069/- towards Programme Expenses Payable. 22. The Ld AO ought to have appreciated that the provisions of section 194J are not applicable to payments made of Rs. 3,00,000/ - towards Audit fee. 23. The Ld AO erred in provoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) without appreciating

AMARA RAJA POWER SYSTEMS LIMITED,TIRUPATI vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), TIRUPATI

disallowances arising out of the payments made\nto the contractors, therefore, the Pr. CIT had wrongly observed that\nthe A.O. had passed the assessment order without making\ninquiries or verification that should have been made. The Ld. A.R.\nfurther submitted that the Pr. CIT had, based on his incorrect\nobservations, triggered the “Explanation 2(a)” to Section

DIWAKAR LOGISTICS ,TADIPATRI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year:2014-15 M/S.Diwakar Logistics Vs. A.C.I.T Tadipatri Circle – 1 Pan:Aahfd0549E Anantapur (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri T. Sunil Goutam, Dr Date Of Hearing: 02/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 05/08/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.12.2019 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Kurnool, Relating To A.Y.2014-15. 2. Fact Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Transportation Of Goods & Filed Its Return Of Income On 29.11.2014 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.31,90,390/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Noted That The Assessee Has Debited Finance Charges Of Rs.2,81,642/- & Transportation Charges Paid To Others Of Rs.74,57,350/-. The Assessing Officer Asked The Assessee To Page 1 Of 8

194C(7) of the Act wherein under the rigors of the section vis-à-vis the transporters was scaled down to a great extent and therefore the order of the Ld CIT (A) in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 74,57,350/- is unsustainable in law. (3

SRI SAI CONSTRUCTION CO,NIZAMABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, NIZAMABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

disallowance of expenditure under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Therefore, it is necessary for us to examine the assumption of jurisdiction by the learned PCIT, in light of relevant evidences placed by the Counsel for the Assessee, to justify it’s case. 13. Admittedly, the original assessment in the present case is under section 143(3

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. SUSHEE PRASAD JV, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Sushee Prasad Jv, Hyderabad, Income Tax, Circle – 6(1), Plot No.246/A/2, Road Hyderabad. No.12, Mla Colony, Banjara Hills, Telangana – 500034. Pan : Aapas3540R. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S. Ramarao, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri Sesha Srinivas, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.03.2024

disallowance of 30% was unwarranted. 10. Section 40 provides as follows Amounts not deductible. 40. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in sections 30 to 41[38], the following amounts shall not be deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession",— (a) in the case of any assessee— 42[(i)43 44any interest

SLR INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

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

194C of the Act. Filing of return of income by the sub-contractors is not within the domain of the assessee and beyond the control of the assessee. Therefore, non-furnishing of return of income by the sub-contractors is not a ground for disbelieving or doubting the genuineness of the payments made by the assessee. Since the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, KHAMMAM, KHAMMAM vs. THE SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LT.D, KOTHAGUDEM, KOTHAGUDEM

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3,49,71,516/-, the AO disallowed this amount u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act with reference to the short deduction u/S 194C of Rs. 1,91,31,631/- and U/s 194J of Rs. 1,58,39,885/-. The CIT(A) deleted the said disallowance by observing as under: “4.4.5. Coming to the portion of short deduction

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1,, KHAMMAM vs. M/S SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LTD.,, KHAMMAM DIST

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3,49,71,516/-, the AO disallowed this amount u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act with reference to the short deduction u/S 194C of Rs. 1,91,31,631/- and U/s 194J of Rs. 1,58,39,885/-. The CIT(A) deleted the said disallowance by observing as under: “4.4.5. Coming to the portion of short deduction

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1,, KHAMMAM vs. M/S SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LTD.,, KHAMMAM DIST

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3,49,71,516/-, the AO disallowed this amount u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act with reference to the short deduction u/S 194C of Rs. 1,91,31,631/- and U/s 194J of Rs. 1,58,39,885/-. The CIT(A) deleted the said disallowance by observing as under: “4.4.5. Coming to the portion of short deduction

THE SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LTD., KOTHJAGUDEM,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CITT, KHAMMAM RANGE, KHAMMAM, KHAMMAM

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3,49,71,516/-, the AO disallowed this amount u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act with reference to the short deduction u/S 194C of Rs. 1,91,31,631/- and U/s 194J of Rs. 1,58,39,885/-. The CIT(A) deleted the said disallowance by observing as under: “4.4.5. Coming to the portion of short deduction

SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, KHAMMAM

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3,49,71,516/-, the AO disallowed this amount u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act with reference to the short deduction u/S 194C of Rs. 1,91,31,631/- and U/s 194J of Rs. 1,58,39,885/-. The CIT(A) deleted the said disallowance by observing as under: “4.4.5. Coming to the portion of short deduction

SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, KHAMMAM

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3,49,71,516/-, the AO disallowed this amount u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act with reference to the short deduction u/S 194C of Rs. 1,91,31,631/- and U/s 194J of Rs. 1,58,39,885/-. The CIT(A) deleted the said disallowance by observing as under: “4.4.5. Coming to the portion of short deduction

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1,, KHAMMAM vs. M/S SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LTD.,, KHAMMAM DIST

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3,49,71,516/-, the AO disallowed this amount u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act with reference to the short deduction u/S 194C of Rs. 1,91,31,631/- and U/s 194J of Rs. 1,58,39,885/-. The CIT(A) deleted the said disallowance by observing as under: “4.4.5. Coming to the portion of short deduction

SINGARENI COLLERIES COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, KHAMMAM

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

3,49,71,516/-, the AO disallowed this amount u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act with reference to the short deduction u/S 194C of Rs. 1,91,31,631/- and U/s 194J of Rs. 1,58,39,885/-. The CIT(A) deleted the said disallowance by observing as under: “4.4.5. Coming to the portion of short deduction