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 2348 and 234D of the Act. The aforesaid grounds are independent and without prejudice to each other. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, modify or withdraw all or any of the Grounds of Appeal contained herein as may be considered necessary either before or during the hearing of the appeals. The Appellant prays that directions be given

REPAL GREEN POWER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 8(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.125/Hyd/2022

234D of the Act while calculating the Appellant's payable demand. Initiation of penalty under Section 270A 11. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 270A of the Act. 5 ITA.Nos.125 & 474/Hyd./2022 The above grounds are independent and without prejudice to one another

XILINX INDIA TECHNOLOGY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-17(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee is partly allowed

234D. 21. The Appellant craves, to consider each of the above grounds of appeal without prejudice to each other and craves leave to add, alter, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds of appeal. 3. The assessee has also raised additional grounds of appeal as under : 1. Education cess and secondary & higher education cess is allowable

REPAL GREEN POWER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.125/Hyd/2022 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Repal Green Power Private Limited, The Dcit, Circle-8(1), Vs. Hyderabad. Hyderabad – 500 081 Pan Aahcr2187F (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.474/Hyd/2022 Assessment Year 2018-2019 Repal Green Power Private Limited, The Dcit, Circle-3(1), Vs. Hyderabad. Hyderabad – 500 081 Pan Aahcr2187F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri Harsh R Shah, Advocate & Ca Karan Jain राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

234D of the Act while calculating the Appellant's payable demand. Initiation of penalty under Section 270A 11. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 270A of the Act. 5 ITA.Nos.125 & 474/Hyd./2022 The above grounds are independent and without prejudice to one another

FINCITY INVESTMENTS P. LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri V. Durga Rao

disallowance of Rs. 2,78,582/- made by the AO. Accordingly, we find no reason to interfere with the decision and hence, uphold the order of CIT(A) on this issue and dismiss the ground raised by the assessee. 10 I.T.A. No. 621/H/15 and others Elem Investments Pvt. Ltd. and others. 12. As regards the issue regarding computation of income

ELEM INVESTMENTS P. LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri V. Durga Rao

disallowance of Rs. 2,78,582/- made by the AO. Accordingly, we find no reason to interfere with the decision and hence, uphold the order of CIT(A) on this issue and dismiss the ground raised by the assessee. 10 I.T.A. No. 621/H/15 and others Elem Investments Pvt. Ltd. and others. 12. As regards the issue regarding computation of income

FINCITY INVESTMENTS P. LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri V. Durga Rao

disallowance of Rs. 2,78,582/- made by the AO. Accordingly, we find no reason to interfere with the decision and hence, uphold the order of CIT(A) on this issue and dismiss the ground raised by the assessee. 10 I.T.A. No. 621/H/15 and others Elem Investments Pvt. Ltd. and others. 12. As regards the issue regarding computation of income

ELEM INVESTMENTS P. LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri V. Durga Rao

disallowance of Rs. 2,78,582/- made by the AO. Accordingly, we find no reason to interfere with the decision and hence, uphold the order of CIT(A) on this issue and dismiss the ground raised by the assessee. 10 I.T.A. No. 621/H/15 and others Elem Investments Pvt. Ltd. and others. 12. As regards the issue regarding computation of income

UBER INDIA SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO UBER INDIA RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

Disallowed 13. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned TPO erred, and Hon'ble DRP further erred in upholding/confirming the action of the learned TPO in not allowing the risk adjustment in accordance with the Rules to account for difference between the risk profile of the Appellant and that of alleged comparable companies

VENKATESH DAGGUBATI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

disallowances and the principles of natural justice. 10. The Learned assessing officer and Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals erred in charging/ upholding interest under section 234D

MALAXMI AGRI VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(4), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16 Malaxmi Agri Ventures Vs. Income Tax Officer Private Limited, Hyderabad Ward 16(4) Pan:Aaccc6517F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Pawan Kumar Chakrapani Revenue By: Shri K P R R Murty, Dr Date Of Hearing: 20/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/07/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.05.2019 Of The Learned Cit (A)-4, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2015-16

disallowing the carry forward of the unabsorbed business loss of Rs. 69,23,479/- and depreciation loss of Rs. 6,96,920/-, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 11. Without prejudice, whether the stating that the learned Authorities below are correct in Appellant has carried only agricultural business, even when operations and not the Appellant has demonstrated that

VIJAYAWADA TOLLWAY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

disallowance of expenditure resulted in enhancement of income and therefore, the Ld. AO was justified in initiating and levying penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 7. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We have also gone through page no. 8 of the reassessment order dated 05.12.2019 passed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

disallowance on merits. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated that the provisions of section 153C of the Act is not applicable to the year under reference as the same is beyond the period of six years preceding the financial year in which the search took place. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the legal

ORBIT VENTURES,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

disallowance on merits. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated that the provisions of section 153C of the Act is not applicable to the year under reference as the same is beyond the period of six years preceding the financial year in which the search took place. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the legal

ORBIT VENTURES,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

disallowance on merits. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated that the provisions of section 153C of the Act is not applicable to the year under reference as the same is beyond the period of six years preceding the financial year in which the search took place. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the legal

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

disallowance on merits. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated that the provisions of section 153C of the Act is not applicable to the year under reference as the same is beyond the period of six years preceding the financial year in which the search took place. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the legal

ORBIT VENTURES,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

disallowance on merits. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated that the provisions of section 153C of the Act is not applicable to the year under reference as the same is beyond the period of six years preceding the financial year in which the search took place. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the legal

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

disallowance on merits. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated that the provisions of section 153C of the Act is not applicable to the year under reference as the same is beyond the period of six years preceding the financial year in which the search took place. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the legal

PITTI HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.450/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19) M/S. Pitti Holdings Pvt. Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Ltd., Hyderabad. Income Tax, Central Circle Pan: Aagcp3824Q 1(1), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A. राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 08/10/2025

disallowances of expenditure are not sustainable in law and liable to be deleted. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. 331 ITR 236 (Bom). 7. On the other hand, the Ld. DR has submitted that the Assessing Officer has followed