DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD vs. PRAGATI GREEN MEADOWS & RESORTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HONBLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HONBLE (Judicial Member)

207/-. The case was subsequently, reopened 3 M/s. Pragathi Green Meadows & Resorts Limited. ITA No. 1795/Hyd/2017 and CO No.31/Hyd/2025 under Section 147 of the Act, for the reasons recorded, as per which the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment on account of excess allowance of interest under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and accordingly

PADMASRI TOWNSHIPS PVT LTD., HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed, in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

207/- which attracted Section 40A(3) disallowance and the Assessing Officer had not verified the said payments. We find that

PADMASRI TOWNSHIPS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed, in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

207/- which attracted Section 40A(3) disallowance and the Assessing Officer had not verified the said payments. We find that

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. IL & FS ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTIONS CO. LIMITED , HYDERABAD

section 194C are not applicable. However, the\nLd.CIT(A) sustained the additions made towards disallowance of\ntransport charges for Rs.1,00,76,106/- and food expenses for\nMaytas Day Celebrations for Rs.10,76,327/-. The Ld.CIT(A) had\nalso sustained additions made towards disallowance of others for\nRs.2,74,91,207

IL & FS ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED(FORMERLY MAYTAS INFRA LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-9, HYDERABAD

section 194C are not applicable. However, the\nLd.CIT(A) sustained the additions made towards disallowance of\ntransport charges for Rs.1,00,76,106/- and food expenses for\nMaytas Day Celebrations for Rs.10,76,327/-. The Ld.CIT(A) had\nalso sustained additions made towards disallowance of others for\nRs.2,74,91,207

MULAKALA MOHAN KRISHNA,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

disallowed the deduction claimed under section 80IA of the Act on the ground that the audit report was not filed within the prescribed time. 7. Aggrieved with the order of CPC, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the action of the CPC. The observation of the Ld. CIT(A) are captured

SAKET ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED,SECUNDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

Section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act. The Hon'ble apex court upheld the disallowance of employees contributions to EPF and ESI is if these contributions are not deposited before the due date prescribed in the respective statutes. Regarding the appellant's claim about the difference in dates between the journal entry for liability recognition of salary

SAKET ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED,SECUNDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

Section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act. The Hon'ble apex court upheld the disallowance of employees contributions to EPF and ESI is if these contributions are not deposited before the due date prescribed in the respective statutes. Regarding the appellant's claim about the difference in dates between the journal entry for liability recognition of salary

AASHISH BANSAL,RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-12(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.723/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Aashish Bansal Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Pali (Rajasthan) Circle 12(1) Pan:Aiqpb8693J Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Jayamala Kankariya राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri K.N. Suresh Babu, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/08/2024 आदेश/Order

disallowing the total value of interest payable on borrowed capital of Rs.17,87,207/-. 4. That the learned CIT (A) have erred in treating let out property as self-occupied property and restricted the claim of loss upto Rs.20,00,000/- and rejecting the appeal. Page 1 of 5 ITA No 723 of 2024 Aashish Bansal 5. That assessee craves

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. M/S KMC CONSTRUCTIONS LTD, HYDERABAD

SECTION OF NH-18 IN THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH BY FOUR LANING ON BOT BASIS-(RAYALSEEMA EXPRESSWAY PVT LTD)\n\n12/10/2010\n5/3/2010\n7/21/2010\nNational Highways Authority of Iradia\nNational Highways Authority of India\nNational Highways Authority of India\n2335094474\n1150959862\n3503679158\n140517517 Allowed in AY 2017-18 (Latest)\nby CIT(A) vida Appeal No\n13423/2019-20/CIT(A)-2 dated\n16.09.2020

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KARIMNAGAR vs. DURGA GRANITES, KARIMNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Sri S.S. Godaraa.Y. 2014-15 Acit, Vs. Durga Granites, Circle-1, Karimnagar. Karimnagar. Pan: Aagfd 8247 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri A. Srinivas Revenue By Sri Rohit Mujumdar, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing: 02/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2022 Order

section 40(b) of the Act, the Ld. AO disallowed the claim of expenditure towards such interest and added the same in the hands of the assessee. Accordingly, the Ld. AO made an aggregate addition of Rs.3,52,50,207

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 (4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the solitary ground raised by the Revenue in the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2017-18 Ravi Rishi Educational A.C.I.T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaaar1952M Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue By: Shri Esthen N Hangal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 07/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/07/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21/04/2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-12, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2017-18. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Aop & Registered U/S 12A Of The I.T. Act Vide Proceedings Of The Director Of Income Tax (Exemption) Hyderabad In F.No.Hqrs/I/15/12A/Dit(E) Dated 27.02.2003. The Assessee Filed Its Original Return Of Income For The A.Y 2017-18 On 06.11.2017 Admitting Total Income Of Rs.Nil. M/S. Ravi Rishi Educational Society Is Run By Close Family Members Mr.N.Rajababu, Mr.Ramesh Babu, Mrs. N. Sulochana, Mrs. N. Yashoda, Mrs. N.

disallowance too out of the donations invoking the provision of section 115 BBC of the Act. This Page 14 of 18 ITA No 146 of 2022 Ravi Rishi Educational Society Hyderabad issue shall be discussed when dealing with the Cross Objection by the assessee. 5. Aggrieved with the said relief given to the assessee, the Revenue filed the main appeal

MANTRI COSMOS II OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.20 & 21/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22) Mantri Cosmos Ii Owners Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Welfare Association Income Tax, Circle 6(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaeam1297J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates K Hari Prasad & K Karthik राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt.M Narmada, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 21/03/2025 आदेश/Order

207 (Kar.), wherein it was held that when a relief is sought for under Section 80IB of the Act, there is no obligation on the part of the assessee to file return accompanied by the audit report, thereby, holding that the same is not mandatory. Therefore, it is clear that before the assessment is completed if such report is filed

MANTRI COSMOS II OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.20 & 21/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22) Mantri Cosmos Ii Owners Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Welfare Association Income Tax, Circle 6(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaeam1297J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates K Hari Prasad & K Karthik राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt.M Narmada, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 21/03/2025 आदेश/Order

207 (Kar.), wherein it was held that when a relief is sought for under Section 80IB of the Act, there is no obligation on the part of the assessee to file return accompanied by the audit report, thereby, holding that the same is not mandatory. Therefore, it is clear that before the assessment is completed if such report is filed

HIGHRADIUS TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

disallowance of INR 13,13,770 pertaining to leave encashment expenses claimed by the Appellant under section 43B of the Act 3.1 The learned AO has erred in not granting a deduction of INR 13,13,770/- /s.43B of the Act 3.2 The Appellant submits that considering the facts and circumstances of its case and the law prevailing

VERMEIREN INDIA REHAB PRIVATE LIMITED,TIRUPATI vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), TIRUPATI

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

disallowance of depreciation of INR 3,57,97,208. Ground No. 2: Corporate Tax: Denial of Depreciation 2.1. In law and facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO/DRP have erred in denying the depreciation claimed by the Assessee on the following grounds: 2.1.1. That the Ld. AO/DRP erred in not granting depreciation on building under section

ASST. DIRECTOR OF IT (EXEMP)-II,, HYDERABAD vs. ACTION FOR WELFARE AND AWAKENING IN RURAL ENVIRONMENT (AWARE), HYDERABAD

In the result, the C.O. filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.709/Hyd/2012 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:1995-96) Asst. Director Of Income Tax Vs. Action For Welfare & (Exemptions)-Ii, Awakening In Rural Hyderabad. Environment (Aware), Shantivanam, Nagarjuna Sagar Road, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaata2338R (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.138/Hyd/2012 (In आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.709/Hyd/2012) ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:1995-96) Asst. Director Of Income Tax Vs. Action For Welfare & (Exemptions)-Ii, Awakening In Rural Hyderabad. Environment (Aware), Pragati Bhavan, D.No.5-9- 24/78, Lake Hill Road, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad- 500463. Pan: Aaata2338R (Respondent/Cross Objector) (Appellant In Appeal) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "वारा/Revenue By:: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 08/01/2026 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pronouncement: 13/02/2026

disallowing the exemption claimed by the assessee u/s.11. 7. The decision the CIT(A) is erroneous both in facts and in law that the A.O. denied exemption against the income earned for the A.Ys. 1991-92, 1992-93 and 1994-95 and accordingly, the same can not be considered as accumulation u/s.11(2) of the 1.T.Act. The Id.CIT(A) failed

LOTUSDEW WEALTH AND INVESTMENT ADVISORS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE - 5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.791/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2021-22)

disallowing the claim of Rs.1,05,18,520/-. 3. Aggrieved by the intimation assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Against which the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal and at the outset, learned AR submitted that they have filed Form 10CCB within the due date