ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

disallowance of any part\nof the interest expenditure was called for in its case; and (ii). that while\ncomputing "average value of investment” for the purpose of Rule\n8D(2)(ii), only the investment made by the assessee company in M/s\nParasakti Cement Limited (supra), which have actually yielded exempt\ndividend income during the relevant previous year

DCIT, CIRCLE-13(1), HYDERABAD vs. THE SINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LIMITED, KOTHAGUDEM

section 194A and other provisions of the\nAct. In paragraph 2 of that D.O. letter, it was stated that\nwhile paying interest, income-tax was deductible at the\nrates in force during that financial year with effect from 1-4-\n1975, if the amount exceeded Rs.1,000.\nPursuant to those instructions, the Land Acquisition\nOfficers, while depositing the enhanced compensation

SINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LIMITED,KOTHAGUDEM vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-13(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee's appeals for the A

section 194A and other provisions of the\nAct. In paragraph 2 of that D.O. letter, it was stated that\nwhile paying interest, income-tax was deductible at the\nrates in force during that financial year with effect from 1-4-\n1975, if the amount exceeded Rs.1,000.\nPursuant to those instructions, the Land Acquisition\nOfficers, while depositing the enhanced compensation

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

disallowed deduction claimed under Section 80IA(4) of the Act, for Rs. 51,05,42,962/- and added it back to the total income of the assessee. The relevant findings of the AO are as under : “3. Deduction u/s 80IA of the Act. As per the return of income filed for AY.2017-18, the assessee has claimed deduction of Rs.51

INDUR AVENUES AND FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,NIZAMABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

Section 14A of the Act. 4. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) for the reasons stated in their order dated 18-09-2020, partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, where he had confirmed the addition made towards disallowance of finance cost to an extent of 15,78,237

INDUR DEVELOPERS AND AGENCIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,VIJAYAWADA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

Section 14A of the Act. 4. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) for the reasons stated in their order dated 18-09-2020, partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, where he had confirmed the addition made towards disallowance of finance cost to an extent of 15,78,237

INDUR AVENUES AND FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,NIZAMABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

Section 14A of the Act. 4. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) for the reasons stated in their order dated 18-09-2020, partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, where he had confirmed the addition made towards disallowance of finance cost to an extent of 15,78,237

UJWALA PUBLICATIONS AND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,WARANGAL vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

section 147 proceedings and finance cost disallowance of Rs.15,78,237/-; respectively. Suffice to say, we make it clear that

PREETHI FOODS AND VILLAS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KHAMMAM vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

section 147 proceedings and finance cost disallowance of Rs.15,78,237/-; respectively. Suffice to say, we make it clear that

KAUSALYA AGRO FORMS & DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

section 147 proceedings and finance cost disallowance of Rs.15,78,237/-; respectively. Suffice to say, we make it clear that

KAUSALYA AGRO FORMS & DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

section 147 proceedings and finance cost disallowance of Rs.15,78,237/-; respectively. Suffice to say, we make it clear that

KASUSALYA SHELTERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

section 147 proceedings and finance cost disallowance of Rs.15,78,237/-; respectively. Suffice to say, we make it clear that

KAPIL FOOD AND STRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED ,WARANGAL vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

section 147 proceedings and finance cost disallowance of Rs.15,78,237/-; respectively. Suffice to say, we make it clear that

KAUSALYA MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND STRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

section 147 proceedings and finance cost disallowance of Rs.15,78,237/-; respectively. Suffice to say, we make it clear that

INDUR DEVELOPERS AND AGENCIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,VIJAYAWADA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

section 147 proceedings and finance cost disallowance of Rs.15,78,237/-; respectively. Suffice to say, we make it clear that

INDUR DEVELOPERS AND AGENCIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,VIJAYAWADA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

section 147 proceedings and finance cost disallowance of Rs.15,78,237/-; respectively. Suffice to say, we make it clear that

KAUSALYA MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND STRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

section 147 proceedings and finance cost disallowance of Rs.15,78,237/-; respectively. Suffice to say, we make it clear that

KAPIL INFRA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED ,VIJAYAWADA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

section 147 proceedings and finance cost disallowance of Rs.15,78,237/-; respectively. Suffice to say, we make it clear that

PREETHI FOODS AND VILLAS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KHAMMAM vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

section 147 proceedings and finance cost disallowance of Rs.15,78,237/-; respectively. Suffice to say, we make it clear that