INVESCO(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2 (1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

section 14A read with Rule 8D of I.T. Rules, 1962. 22. The assessee has claimed an amount of Rs.1,98,96,436/- as exempt income on account of dividend income received on investments in units of mutual funds. The assessee has made a suo motu disallowance of 43 ITA.No.111/Hyd./2022 expenditure relatable to exempt income of Rs.11,59,197

PIONEER GENCO LIMITED.,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(3), HYDERABAD

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhappellant Respondent

disallowance ultimately directed works out to nearly 110% of that sum, i.e., Rs.52,56,197/-. By no stretch of imagination can Section

PIONEER POWER CORPORATION LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(3), HYDERABAD

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhappellant Respondent

disallowance ultimately directed works out to nearly 110% of that sum, i.e., Rs.52,56,197/-. By no stretch of imagination can Section

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1018/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Andhra Bank Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 1(1) Pan:Aabca7375C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1230/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 ) Dy. C. I. T. Vs. Andhra Bank Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabca7375C (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ananthan, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 28/08/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee, As Well As The Revenue, Are Directed Against The Order Dated 16/02/2016 Of Page 1 Of 59

197/- considering it as income. 2.1. The Commissioner of income tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate the fact that there is no provision in the Income Tax Act under which such provision can be considered as income. 2.2. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in not following the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the Appellant bank

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1018/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Andhra Bank Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 1(1) Pan:Aabca7375C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1230/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 ) Dy. C. I. T. Vs. Andhra Bank Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabca7375C (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ananthan, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 28/08/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee, As Well As The Revenue, Are Directed Against The Order Dated 16/02/2016 Of Page 1 Of 59

197/- considering it as income. 2.1. The Commissioner of income tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate the fact that there is no provision in the Income Tax Act under which such provision can be considered as income. 2.2. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in not following the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the Appellant bank

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.350 & 351/Hyd/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Dy. C. I. T. Vs. Andhra Bank Circle-1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aabca7375C] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.364 & 365/Hyd/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Union Bank Of India Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (Erstwhile Andhra Bank) Circle-1(1) Mumbai Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacu0564G (Aabca7375C)] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S.Ananthan & Smt.Lalitha Rameswaran, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri K.Meghnath Chowhan, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of 05/11/2024 Hearing: घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 24/01/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha G., A.M

disallow entire deduction claimed merely on the basis of nomenclature used by the assessee. 29. We, further note that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the ITAT, Hyderabad Benches in appellant’s own case in ITA Nos.1018/Hyd/2017 and 1230/Hyd/2017 dated 28.08.2024 for the A.Y 2012-13, where under identical set of facts

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.350 & 351/Hyd/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Dy. C. I. T. Vs. Andhra Bank Circle-1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aabca7375C] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.364 & 365/Hyd/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Union Bank Of India Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (Erstwhile Andhra Bank) Circle-1(1) Mumbai Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacu0564G (Aabca7375C)] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S.Ananthan & Smt.Lalitha Rameswaran, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri K.Meghnath Chowhan, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of 05/11/2024 Hearing: घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 24/01/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha G., A.M

disallow entire deduction claimed merely on the basis of nomenclature used by the assessee. 29. We, further note that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the ITAT, Hyderabad Benches in appellant’s own case in ITA Nos.1018/Hyd/2017 and 1230/Hyd/2017 dated 28.08.2024 for the A.Y 2012-13, where under identical set of facts

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.350 & 351/Hyd/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Dy. C. I. T. Vs. Andhra Bank Circle-1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aabca7375C] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.364 & 365/Hyd/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Union Bank Of India Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (Erstwhile Andhra Bank) Circle-1(1) Mumbai Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacu0564G (Aabca7375C)] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S.Ananthan & Smt.Lalitha Rameswaran, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri K.Meghnath Chowhan, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of 05/11/2024 Hearing: घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 24/01/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha G., A.M

disallow entire deduction claimed merely on the basis of nomenclature used by the assessee. 29. We, further note that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the ITAT, Hyderabad Benches in appellant’s own case in ITA Nos.1018/Hyd/2017 and 1230/Hyd/2017 dated 28.08.2024 for the A.Y 2012-13, where under identical set of facts

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.350 & 351/Hyd/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Dy. C. I. T. Vs. Andhra Bank Circle-1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aabca7375C] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.364 & 365/Hyd/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Union Bank Of India Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (Erstwhile Andhra Bank) Circle-1(1) Mumbai Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacu0564G (Aabca7375C)] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S.Ananthan & Smt.Lalitha Rameswaran, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri K.Meghnath Chowhan, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of 05/11/2024 Hearing: घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 24/01/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha G., A.M

disallow entire deduction claimed merely on the basis of nomenclature used by the assessee. 29. We, further note that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the ITAT, Hyderabad Benches in appellant’s own case in ITA Nos.1018/Hyd/2017 and 1230/Hyd/2017 dated 28.08.2024 for the A.Y 2012-13, where under identical set of facts

KAMLESH RANKA,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTL. TAXATION-II, , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyassessment Year: 2012-13 Kamlesh Ranka, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Intl. Taxation-Ii, Pan: Acbpr 3953 N Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri D. Satyanarayana Revenue By: Sri Nilanjan Dey Date Of Hearing: 22/07/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 12/09/2019

disallowing the benefit of section 54 of the Act to the extent of Rs. 22,09,968/- [Rs. 28,67,455 + Rs. 46, 53,666(being the aggregate amount of investment made in two residential flats within the period of due date of filing the return of income U/s. 139(4) of the Act) =Rs.7521121/- (–) Rs. 53,11,153/- (being

ANRAK ALUMINIUM LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Appeal is partly allowed in foregoing terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Section 14A r.w. Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Income Tax Rules in arriving proportionate interest expenditure disallowance of Rs.3,37,63,307/-. Case records and more particularly para 3.4 of the assessment order suggests that the assessee was found to have made investments of Rs.17,41,46,612/- relating to its exempt income from dividends to the tune

PODDUTURI RAJASHEKHAR REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

Section 197(b), the subject undisclosed income was to be brought to tax in the previous year in which such declaration was made. The A.O., observing that the assessee had failed to pay the tax, surcharge and penalty as per IDS, 2016, and also not offered any such income in his return of income for A.Y. 2017-18, issued

SAPTAGIRI GRAMEENA BANK,CHITTOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, TIRUPATI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

197(1A) of the Act. 9. The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities and submitted that the AO is entitled to verify the details required including the declarations while deciding whether the assessee is an assessee deemed to be in default or not and there are provisions for various

SAPTAGIRI GRAMEENA BANK,CHITTOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, TIRUPATI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

197(1A) of the Act. 9. The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities and submitted that the AO is entitled to verify the details required including the declarations while deciding whether the assessee is an assessee deemed to be in default or not and there are provisions for various

SAPTAGIRI GRAMEENA BANK,CHITTOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, TIRUPATI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

197(1A) of the Act. 9. The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities and submitted that the AO is entitled to verify the details required including the declarations while deciding whether the assessee is an assessee deemed to be in default or not and there are provisions for various

SAPTAGIRI GRAMEENA BANK,CHITTOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, TIRUPATI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

197(1A) of the Act. 9. The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities and submitted that the AO is entitled to verify the details required including the declarations while deciding whether the assessee is an assessee deemed to be in default or not and there are provisions for various

NANDAN CLEANTEC LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

197/-. Subsequently, a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the I.T. Act was conducted in the case of the assessee and its Directors Sri Moturi Srinivas Prasad and Shri Volam Bhaskar Rao on 20.09.2017. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act issued on 10.05.2018, the assessee filed its return of income on 13.12.2018 declaring total income

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD vs. REJUVENTING APPROACHES PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

197/-. Subsequently, a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the I.T. Act was conducted in the case of the assessee and its Directors Sri Moturi Srinivas Prasad and Shri Volam Bhaskar Rao on 20.09.2017. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act issued on 10.05.2018, the assessee filed its return of income on 13.12.2018 declaring total income

NANDAN CLEANTEC LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

197/-. Subsequently, a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the I.T. Act was conducted in the case of the assessee and its Directors Sri Moturi Srinivas Prasad and Shri Volam Bhaskar Rao on 20.09.2017. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act issued on 10.05.2018, the assessee filed its return of income on 13.12.2018 declaring total income