BIOLOGICAL E LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

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

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

disallowance. However, by way of same order, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal observed the interest under section 234A

F5 NETWORKS INNOVATION PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section 11 is already considered in the regular assessment and that issue is already in appeal before FAA. Therefore, reviewing the same is uncalled for.” 8. Accordingly, in view of the above cited judgement of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court as well as the decision of the Delhi Benches of the Tribunal, we hold that the processing

PATEL SEW JOINT VENTURE,TELANGANA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

section 143(1) of the Act passed by the Ld. AO is bad in law. 2) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in disallowing the claim of deduction u/s 801A(4) of the Act of Rs.7,88,79,105/-in respect of profits and gains derived from the business of development

ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD vs. PATEL SEW JOINTVENTURE, HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

section 143(1) of the Act passed by the Ld. AO is bad in law. 2) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in disallowing the claim of deduction u/s 801A(4) of the Act of Rs.7,88,79,105/-in respect of profits and gains derived from the business of development

THE WARANGAL DISTRICT COOPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LIMITED,HANAMKONDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.364/Hyd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2021-22) The Warangal District Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Cooperative Central Bank Income Tax, Limited, Hanamkonda, Circle-3(1), Warangal. Hyderabad. Pan: Aabtt3137G (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 11/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 14/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M:

sections 234A, 234B or 234C shall be admissible, in line with the CBDT order dated 01.09.2025. 14. Apropos the disallowance

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

disallowing the loss of Rs. 70,59,688/-, claimed by the Appellant in the return of income, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in making an addition of Rs. 1,13,37,000/-, under section 68 of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case. Page

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

disallowing the loss of Rs. 70,59,688/-, claimed by the Appellant in the return of income, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in making an addition of Rs. 1,13,37,000/-, under section 68 of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case. Page

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

disallowing the loss of Rs. 70,59,688/-, claimed by the Appellant in the return of income, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in making an addition of Rs. 1,13,37,000/-, under section 68 of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case. Page

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

disallowing the loss of Rs. 70,59,688/-, claimed by the Appellant in the return of income, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in making an addition of Rs. 1,13,37,000/-, under section 68 of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case. Page

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

disallowing the loss of Rs. 70,59,688/-, claimed by the Appellant in the return of income, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in making an addition of Rs. 1,13,37,000/-, under section 68 of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case. Page

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

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.685/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Sbpl Infrastructure Vs. Deputy Commissioner Limited Of Income Tax Hyderabad Circle-3(1) [Pan : Aaccs9014M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Sashank Dundu, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri M.Vijay Kumar,Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 16/12/2024 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Learned Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 13.02.2024 & Pertains To A.Y.2014-15. 2. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Time Barred By 94 Days. The Assessee Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay & Submitted That Shri Manoj Sharma, Chief Financial Officer Of The Appellant Company, Who Was Entrusted With The Job Of Looking

disallowed invoking the provisions of section 14A even though the appellant had demonstrated that the entire investment was made out of surplus funds and no interest bearing funds were utilised. 10. The lower authorities erred in invoking the provisions of section 234A

YADIKI PACS,ANANTAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ANANTAPUR

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

Bench: the Andhra Pradesh High Court against the Order of the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad rejecting the appellant's application filed u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act to condone the delay in filing the Income Tax Return for the subject AY 2019-20 is pending for disposal as on date. 7. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had erred in confirming the levy of interest u/s 234A of the Act in consequence to the above." 3

234A of the Act in consequence to the above.” 3 Yadiki PACS 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a Trust, has not filed its return of income under Section 139 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) for the A.Y. 2019-20. As per the information available with the Department through

INFOR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS INFOR GLOBAL SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Memebr Assessment Year: 2012-13 Infor (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Infor Income-Tax, Hyderabad. Global Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd.), Hyderabad Pan – Aaacb6197Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Sunil Motilala Revenue By: Shri Yvst Sai

SECTION 234A, 234B & 234C OF THE ACT 21. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in and the Hon'ble DRP further erred in upholding I confirming the action of the Ld. AO in levying interest uls 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act and the said levy of interest

GLOBALLOGIC TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2020-21 Global Logic Technologies Vs. Assessing Officer (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aadcr5222K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: C.A Tanpreet Kohli Revenue By: Shri A.R. Kumar Aditya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 05/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 05/01/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 3.10.2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac, Delhi Relating To A.Y.2020-21. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In Rendering It Related Services. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 15.2.2022 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.26,67,20,510/- Under The Normal Provisions Of The Act & Book Profit Under The Provisions Of Section 115Jb At Rs.58,28,72,316/-. The Cpc Bangalore In Its Intimation U/S 143(1)(A) Of The Act Apart From Other Addition/Disallowance Made Disallowance Of Rs.2,28,56,810/- On Account Of Late Deposit Of Page 1 Of 5

disallowable under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 3. That the learned CIT(A) erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming interest under section 234A

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

disallowed the expenditure incurred towards life tax, registration charges amounting to Rs. 1,32,595/-. (iii) The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in upholding the order of the ld. AO who had made addition of Rs. 54,96,657/- towards levy of interest U/s. 234A of the Act. (iv) The Ld. CIT (A) has erred upholding the addition made

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

disallowed the expenditure incurred towards life tax, registration charges amounting to Rs. 1,32,595/-. (iii) The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in upholding the order of the ld. AO who had made addition of Rs. 54,96,657/- towards levy of interest U/s. 234A of the Act. (iv) The Ld. CIT (A) has erred upholding the addition made

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

disallowed the expenditure incurred towards life tax, registration charges amounting to Rs. 1,32,595/-. (iii) The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in upholding the order of the ld. AO who had made addition of Rs. 54,96,657/- towards levy of interest U/s. 234A of the Act. (iv) The Ld. CIT (A) has erred upholding the addition made

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

disallowed the expenditure incurred towards life tax, registration charges amounting to Rs. 1,32,595/-. (iii) The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in upholding the order of the ld. AO who had made addition of Rs. 54,96,657/- towards levy of interest U/s. 234A of the Act. (iv) The Ld. CIT (A) has erred upholding the addition made