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)

194C of the Act in respect of freight and forwarding charges, in our considered view, there is no error in the reasons given by the A.O. to disallow 30% of the said expenditure under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 39. In respect of machinery hire charges of Rs. 16,88,379/-, the assessee claims that, it has deducted

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

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 under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, either in the ITR of the assessee are in the assessment order. The Assessing Officer failed to verify the above three issues in light of relevant facts which render the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of Revenue. Therefore, called-upon the 7 ITA.No.670/Hyd./2025 assessee to file

AMRCL KCL (JV),HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-6(1), HYDERABAD

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

disallowance of subcontract expenditure under Section 40a(ia) of the Act, for non-deduction of tax at source under Section 194C of the Act. 7

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

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(4), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Bleassessment Year – 2017-18 Prathima Infrastructure Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Filmnagar, Central Circle – 2(4), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabcp2098P. (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee By: Shri K.C.Devdas, Ca Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.11.2024

7 submitted that, it has satisfied all the three conditions provided under Section 80IA(4) of the Act, for claiming deduction towards profits derived from eligible project. The appellant further contended that the work has been awarded to M/s. HCC-MEIL- BHEL (JV) in terms of agreement dated 02-12-2008, but the civil work in the project

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD vs. MADHUCON SINO HYDRO JV, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1344, 1311 & 1312/Hyd/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/S. Madhucon Sino Hydro Jv, Hyderabad. ….Appellant. Pan:Aanfm1451G Vs. 1. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad. 2. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad. 3. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad. ….Respondents.

7 1004 & 1005/Hyd/2018 receipts received from the contractee to its constituents without retaining any portion of the profit. Hence, it is the contention of the Ld. AR that the payment made by JV to its constituents is not in the nature of sub-contract and the provisions of section 194C is not applicable to the assessee. We found that

MADHUCON SINO HYDRA JV ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1344, 1311 & 1312/Hyd/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/S. Madhucon Sino Hydro Jv, Hyderabad. ….Appellant. Pan:Aanfm1451G Vs. 1. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad. 2. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad. 3. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad. ….Respondents.

7 1004 & 1005/Hyd/2018 receipts received from the contractee to its constituents without retaining any portion of the profit. Hence, it is the contention of the Ld. AR that the payment made by JV to its constituents is not in the nature of sub-contract and the provisions of section 194C is not applicable to the assessee. We found that

MADHUCON SINO HYDRO JV,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1344, 1311 & 1312/Hyd/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/S. Madhucon Sino Hydro Jv, Hyderabad. ….Appellant. Pan:Aanfm1451G Vs. 1. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad. 2. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad. 3. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad. ….Respondents.

7 1004 & 1005/Hyd/2018 receipts received from the contractee to its constituents without retaining any portion of the profit. Hence, it is the contention of the Ld. AR that the payment made by JV to its constituents is not in the nature of sub-contract and the provisions of section 194C is not applicable to the assessee. We found that

MADHUCON SINO HYDRO JV,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1344, 1311 & 1312/Hyd/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/S. Madhucon Sino Hydro Jv, Hyderabad. ….Appellant. Pan:Aanfm1451G Vs. 1. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad. 2. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad. 3. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad. ….Respondents.

7 1004 & 1005/Hyd/2018 receipts received from the contractee to its constituents without retaining any portion of the profit. Hence, it is the contention of the Ld. AR that the payment made by JV to its constituents is not in the nature of sub-contract and the provisions of section 194C is not applicable to the assessee. We found that

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

ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. LAMPEX ELECTRONICS LIMITED , HYDERABAD

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

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

disallowance of expenditure towards currency fluctuations. 6. Assessee, therefore, filed ITA No. 589/Hyd/2020 in respect of the additions sustained and Revenue filed ITA No. 96/Hyd/2021 in respect of the relief granted to the assessee by the learned CIT(A). Assessee preferred cross objection supporting the view taken by the Learned CIT(A) while granting relief to the assessee. Page

LAMPEX ELECTRONICS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

disallowance of expenditure towards currency fluctuations. 6. Assessee, therefore, filed ITA No. 589/Hyd/2020 in respect of the additions sustained and Revenue filed ITA No. 96/Hyd/2021 in respect of the relief granted to the assessee by the learned CIT(A). Assessee preferred cross objection supporting the view taken by the Learned CIT(A) while granting relief to the assessee. Page

GLOBAL DEVELOPERS,NELLORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, NELLORE

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1683/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Global Developers, Vs. Dcit, Nellore. Circle-1, Pan: Aagfg8471R Nellore. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: None राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Sankar Pandi. P, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 28/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 04/02/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M:

194C): Rs.1,09,885/-; (ii) interest other than the interest on securities (under section 194A): Rs.35,85,844/-; (iii) fees for professional or technical services (under section 194J): Rs.6,000/-; and (iv) rent (under section 194I): Rs.1,55,880/-. In our view, as the assessee firm had failed to deposit tax deducted at source (TDS) of Rs.38,57,609/- (supra

CELESTIAL AVENUES PVT LTD REP. BY CSK PROPERTIES PVT LTD ON MERGER-PAN-AADCC3990R,HYDERABAD. vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD.

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha G, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.212 To 214/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/S. Sabir, Sew & The Deputy Commissioner Of Prasad, Jv, Vs. Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 6(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Abcfs2425A अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

disallowance of the claim under Section 80IA after the search proceedings carried out on the searched person 12 SABIR, SEW & PRASAD JV when no incriminating material was found disclosing the escapement of income as required u/s 153C of the Act. 8. Per contra, Ld.DR submitted that in the present case, the search was carried out in the premises

AGA PUBICATIONS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.518/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14) Aga Publications Ltd Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 1(1) Pan:Aabca8511G Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Karthik Manickam,Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 29/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 29/10/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 03/04/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2013-14. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Publication Of Newspapers, Filed Its Return Of Income For The A.Y 2013-14 On 22/07/2014 Declaring An Income Of Rs.35,35,790/-Under Normal Provisions Of The Act & Book Profits Of Rs.(-) 1,46,21,872/-. During The Page 1 Of 7

7 ITA No 518 of 2024 AGA Publications Ltd has reimbursed Rs.1,13,27,615/- to Superior Printers (P) Ltd for reimbursement of various expenditure incurred by the above party on behalf of the assessee. Both the payments have bee made without deducting tax at source as per the provisions of section 194C of the Act, The Assessing Officer disallowed

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

disallowance of the claim under Section 80IA\nafter the search proceedings carried out on the searched person\nwhen no incriminating material was found disclosing the\nescapement of income as required u/s 153C of the Act.\n8.\nPer contra, Ld.DR submitted that in the present case, the search\nwas carried out in the premises of the searched person on\n06.11.2017

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

disallowance of the claim under Section 80IA\nafter the search proceedings carried out on the searched person\nwhen no incriminating material was found disclosing the\nescapement of income as required u/s 153C of the Act.\n\n8.\nPer contra, Ld.DR submitted that in the present case, the search\nwas carried out in the premises of the searched person on\n06.11.2017