CHEDEDEEPU SRINIVAS,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

244/-, by disallowance under section 36(i)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act, on the facts and circumstances

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

244/- by invoking the provisions of section 50C of the Act and further disallowing the benefit of section 54 of the Act to the extent

MAHMOOD HUSSAIN SYED,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and determined the total income at Rs. 6,69,47,580/- by inter alia making addition towards disallowance of excess claim of interest against income from house property for Rs. 5,39,579/- and addition of Rs. 2,37,92,244

SREE KANYAKA MUTUALLY AIDED CO-OP THRIFT CREDIT AND MARKETG. SOCIETY LIMITED,HINDUPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, HINDUPUR

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

244/- and added the same to the total income of the assessee under the head income from other sources u/s.56 of the Act. The observation of the Ld. AO for such disallowance is covered under para no. 5 to 10 of his order, which is reproduced as under : 5. In response to this, the assessee has submitted his reply

NITIN BHATIA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-12(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1472/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Nitin Bhatia Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 12 (1) Pan:Akqpb1898R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Y.V Bhanu Narayan Rao राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

244/-. 4. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). The Ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee and upheld the addition made by the Ld. AO. 5. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. At the outset

ANDHRA PRADESH GAS POWER CORPORATION LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

section 115JB of the Act. During the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) for the A.Ys 2011- 12 and 2012-13, the assessments were initially completed u/s Page 1 of 17 ITA Nos 2092 2093 and 2094 of 2018 AP Gas Power Corporation Ltd Hyderabad. 143(3). Later it was noticed that the assessee company has paid $4.30 per MMBTU

ANDHRA PRADESH GAS POWER CORPORATION LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

section 115JB of the Act. During the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) for the A.Ys 2011- 12 and 2012-13, the assessments were initially completed u/s Page 1 of 17 ITA Nos 2092 2093 and 2094 of 2018 AP Gas Power Corporation Ltd Hyderabad. 143(3). Later it was noticed that the assessee company has paid $4.30 per MMBTU

ANDHRA PRADESH GAS POWER CORPORATION LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

section 115JB of the Act. During the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) for the A.Ys 2011- 12 and 2012-13, the assessments were initially completed u/s Page 1 of 17 ITA Nos 2092 2093 and 2094 of 2018 AP Gas Power Corporation Ltd Hyderabad. 143(3). Later it was noticed that the assessee company has paid $4.30 per MMBTU

SUMATHI CORPORATE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

section 2(24)(x) of the Act towards delayed remittance of employees’ contribution towards EPF and ESI. 3. In the appeal preferred against such a disallowance, assessee pleaded that such an amount was deposited before the due date to file the return of income and, therefore, the disallowance is not justified. Learned CIT(A) turned down such a plea placing

ACIT., EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. PHARMACEUTICALS EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL OF INDIA, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. Pharmaceuticals Export Of Income Tax, Promotion Council Of India, Exemptions, Circle – 1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aadcp4643C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rv. Chalam, C.A. Revenue By: Shri B. Balakrishna, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.02.2025

244 in the commentary under Section 11 of the present Act. The view remains unchanged in the 8th Edition brought out in the year 1990 (at page 349) and in the 9th Edition brought out in the year 2004 (at page 505). We are fortified in our conclusion by the view expressed by the learned authors. 27. We now come

LYCOS INTERNET LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

disallowances and computed the taxable income under the normal provisions of the Act at Rs.3,37,52,244/- and book profit as per MAT provisions for Rs.32,82,86,986/-. The assessee challenged the order of the Assessing Officer before the learned CIT (A) which was partly allowed vide order dated 23/06/2017 and the Revenue has filed an appeal against

MAANAVEEYA DEVELOPMENT & FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

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

244/, (Emphasis supplied). It used Comparable Uncontrolled Price method (CUP) to determine the arm's length price for the interest, Considering the above interest rates of various banks. 11 % of interest incurred by the assessee company on CCO of Okio credit is considered at ALP under CUP, This was not accepted by the TPO who relying on the following decisions

MAANAVEEYA DEVELOPMENT & FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

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

244/, (Emphasis supplied). It used Comparable Uncontrolled Price method (CUP) to determine the arm's length price for the interest, Considering the above interest rates of various banks. 11 % of interest incurred by the assessee company on CCO of Okio credit is considered at ALP under CUP, This was not accepted by the TPO who relying on the following decisions

MAANAVEEYA DEVELOPMENT & FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD

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

244/, (Emphasis supplied). It used Comparable Uncontrolled Price method (CUP) to determine the arm's length price for the interest, Considering the above interest rates of various banks. 11 % of interest incurred by the assessee company on CCO of Okio credit is considered at ALP under CUP, This was not accepted by the TPO who relying on the following decisions

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD vs. MAANAVEEYA DEVELOPMENT & FINANCE (P) LIMITED , HYDERABAD

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

244/, (Emphasis supplied). It used Comparable Uncontrolled Price method (CUP) to determine the arm's length price for the interest, Considering the above interest rates of various banks. 11 % of interest incurred by the assessee company on CCO of Okio credit is considered at ALP under CUP, This was not accepted by the TPO who relying on the following decisions

MAANAVEEYA DEVELOPMENT & FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD

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

244/, (Emphasis supplied). It used Comparable Uncontrolled Price method (CUP) to determine the arm's length price for the interest, Considering the above interest rates of various banks. 11 % of interest incurred by the assessee company on CCO of Okio credit is considered at ALP under CUP, This was not accepted by the TPO who relying on the following decisions

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD vs. MAANAVEEYA DEVELOPMENT & FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

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

244/, (Emphasis supplied). It used Comparable Uncontrolled Price method (CUP) to determine the arm's length price for the interest, Considering the above interest rates of various banks. 11 % of interest incurred by the assessee company on CCO of Okio credit is considered at ALP under CUP, This was not accepted by the TPO who relying on the following decisions

DCIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. MAANAVEEYA DEVELOPMENT & FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

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

244/, (Emphasis supplied). It used Comparable Uncontrolled Price method (CUP) to determine the arm's length price for the interest, Considering the above interest rates of various banks. 11 % of interest incurred by the assessee company on CCO of Okio credit is considered at ALP under CUP, This was not accepted by the TPO who relying on the following decisions

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. GVK TECHNICAL & CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14

244/- paid towards employees contribution to the PF as the same was paid beyond the due date under the PF Act. 2 I.T.A. No. 1378/Hyd/2017 GVK Technical and Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., Hyd 3. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) following the decision of ITAT, Hyderabad in assessee