TEKSYSTEMS GLOBAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as directed above

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

disallowed on the ground that such assets were not put to use by the assessee during the year under consideration. When once we accept the Page 7 of 10 BTA, it goes without saying that the assessee acquired the IT services division of Allegis India on a going concern basis. Submission made on behalf of the assessee that

TIRUMALA ESTATES,HYDERABAD vs. ITO,WARD-4(5), HYDERABAD

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 26 of the IT Act and the reflection of TDS in Form 26AS of the partnership, the Hon'ble Commissioner is requested to direct the Assessing Officer to issue balance of refund of Rs. 13,79,565/- (14,24,740/--45, 175) along with interest u/s. 244A of the I.T.Act. In case the Hon’ble Commissioner needs any further

TIRUMALA ESTATES,HYDERABAD vs. ITO,WARD-4(5), HYDERABAD

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 26 of the IT Act and the reflection of TDS in Form 26AS of the partnership, the Hon'ble Commissioner is requested to direct the Assessing Officer to issue balance of refund of Rs. 13,79,565/- (14,24,740/--45, 175) along with interest u/s. 244A of the I.T.Act. In case the Hon’ble Commissioner needs any further

VARIETY POLYESTERS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2013-14

section 43B of the Act to the tune of Rs.1,45,051/- and u/s 40(a)(ia) to the tune of Rs.9,20,000/- and interest u/s 244A of Rs.27,030/-. 4. Aggrieved by these disallowances and additions, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A). Learned CIT (A) by way of the impugned order, upheld the disallowance

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs. AMELINANE RAVINDRA CHOWDARY, ANANTAPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Sections of IT Act such as 40(a)(ia) and 40A(3) etc. 4) Whether CIT(A) is right in not appreciating the fact that cash credits can be taxed separately even when income is estimated and thereby wrongly allowing telescoping of cash credit addition. 5) Any other additional ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs. AMELINANE RAVINDRA CHOWDARY, ANANTAPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Sections of IT Act such as 40(a)(ia) and 40A(3) etc. 4) Whether CIT(A) is right in not appreciating the fact that cash credits can be taxed separately even when income is estimated and thereby wrongly allowing telescoping of cash credit addition. 5) Any other additional ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing

NEERAJ KUMAR AGARWAL ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (e) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have followed the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of ITO v. Volkart Brothers and Others, 82 ITR 50 (S.C.) with regard to mistake apparent from record that qualities for an action