ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. USHODAYA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

section 234B/234C, which was disallowed in the earlier years.\n2. An amount of Rs.2,09,08,248/- was credited to Profit and Loss Account in F.Y. 2017-18 towards the reversal of excess interest debited in earlier years, computed as under:\nSr\nInterest\nrelating\nto A.Y.\n(1)\nInterest\nDetermined\non\n(2)\nInterest\ndebited\nto P&L\nA/c

MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result. appeal of the Assessee is partly\nallowed for statistical purposes and appeal of Revenue is\npartly allowed for statistical purposes

disallowances under Section 14A.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "92CA", "35(2AB)", "14A", "Rule 8D", "115JB", "10(34)", "32", "Section 143(3)", "Section

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

disallowance of\nthe claim of deduction of the assessee company under Section 801A of\nthe Act: Rs. 24,35,05,411/-; and (iv) addition

FEDERATION OF AP COOPERATIVE URBAN BANKS AND CREDIT SOCIETIES LIMITED HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.464/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Federation Of Ap Vs. Income Tax Officer Cooperative Urban Banks Ward 9(1) & Credit Societies Ltd. Hyderabad Hyd, Hyderabad Pan:Aaaaf7350F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri V. Ravish Bhatt, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 29/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/11/2025

35 the e-mail address belonging to Shri K.S. Venkat Rao, a senior member of the society who was designated as Chief Executive Officer, for communication of notices. In the year 2024, after the retirement of Shri Venkat Rao, the society updated its official e-mail ID. However, in the interregnum, the Ld. First Appellate Authority passed the appellate order

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

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

disallowed 30% of the said expenditure under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the relevant facts, has rightly sustained the additions made by the A.O. Therefore, he submitted that, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) should be upheld. 35

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

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

disallowed 30% of the said expenditure under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the relevant facts, has rightly sustained the additions made by the A.O. Therefore, he submitted that, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) should be upheld. 35

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

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

disallowed 30% of the said expenditure under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the relevant facts, has rightly sustained the additions made by the A.O. Therefore, he submitted that, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) should be upheld. 35

CHINTALAPATI HOLDINGS PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

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

section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules are applicable to the facts of the case, and proceeded to make addition under 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules and 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules to reach the figure of disallowance at Rs. 3,71,27,320/-. Learned Assessing Officer, however, restricted the same

CHINTALAPATI HOLDINGS PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

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

section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules are applicable to the facts of the case, and proceeded to make addition under 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules and 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules to reach the figure of disallowance at Rs. 3,71,27,320/-. Learned Assessing Officer, however, restricted the same

CHINTALAPATI HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

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

section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules are applicable to the facts of the case, and proceeded to make addition under 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules and 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules to reach the figure of disallowance at Rs. 3,71,27,320/-. Learned Assessing Officer, however, restricted the same

DCIT, CIRCLE-17(2), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. VIBHA AGROTECH LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue and appeal of the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

section 35(2AB) of the Act by making an application for grant of Form 3CM & 3CL, then the exemption 35(2AB) cannot be denied. 4.b The Ld. CIT (A) erred in disallowing

VIBHA AGROTECH LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue and appeal of the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

section 35(2AB) of the Act by making an application for grant of Form 3CM & 3CL, then the exemption 35(2AB) cannot be denied. 4.b The Ld. CIT (A) erred in disallowing

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. LAURUS LABS LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, ITA No.121/Hyd/2024 is allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 201, 202 & 203/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Laurus Labs Limited Income Tax Vs. Visakhapatnam Circle-5(1), Hyderabad [Pan : Aabcl1170C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 121/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 ) Laurus Labs Limited Asst.Commissioner Visakhapatnam Vs. Of Income Tax [Pan : Aabcl1170C] Circle-16(1) Hyderabad अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

disallowed the investment allowance claimed by the assessee under section 32AD of the Act. 4. Learned Assessing Officer opined that in respect of the expenditure incurred by the assessee towards clinical trials, the assessee is entitled to the 100% deduction, but not at 200% as claimed by the assessee under section 35

LAURUS LABS LIMITED,VISHAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA No.121/Hyd/2024 is allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 201, 202 & 203/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Laurus Labs Limited Income Tax Vs. Visakhapatnam Circle-5(1), Hyderabad [Pan : Aabcl1170C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 121/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 ) Laurus Labs Limited Asst.Commissioner Visakhapatnam Vs. Of Income Tax [Pan : Aabcl1170C] Circle-16(1) Hyderabad अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

disallowed the investment allowance claimed by the assessee under section 32AD of the Act. 4. Learned Assessing Officer opined that in respect of the expenditure incurred by the assessee towards clinical trials, the assessee is entitled to the 100% deduction, but not at 200% as claimed by the assessee under section 35

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. LAURUS LABS LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, ITA No.121/Hyd/2024 is allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 201, 202 & 203/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Laurus Labs Limited Income Tax Vs. Visakhapatnam Circle-5(1), Hyderabad [Pan : Aabcl1170C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 121/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 ) Laurus Labs Limited Asst.Commissioner Visakhapatnam Vs. Of Income Tax [Pan : Aabcl1170C] Circle-16(1) Hyderabad अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

disallowed the investment allowance claimed by the assessee under section 32AD of the Act. 4. Learned Assessing Officer opined that in respect of the expenditure incurred by the assessee towards clinical trials, the assessee is entitled to the 100% deduction, but not at 200% as claimed by the assessee under section 35

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. LAURUS LABS LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, ITA No.121/Hyd/2024 is allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 201, 202 & 203/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Laurus Labs Limited Income Tax Vs. Visakhapatnam Circle-5(1), Hyderabad [Pan : Aabcl1170C] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 121/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 ) Laurus Labs Limited Asst.Commissioner Visakhapatnam Vs. Of Income Tax [Pan : Aabcl1170C] Circle-16(1) Hyderabad अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

disallowed the investment allowance claimed by the assessee under section 32AD of the Act. 4. Learned Assessing Officer opined that in respect of the expenditure incurred by the assessee towards clinical trials, the assessee is entitled to the 100% deduction, but not at 200% as claimed by the assessee under section 35

KASUSALYA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR 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

disallowance of finance charges of Rs.95,48,200/- confirmed by the ld.CIT(A) under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that the real estate companies of Kapil Group have been accepting advance for sales of residential / commercial office space by entering into an MOU with potential

KASUSALYA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KARIMNAGAR 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

disallowance of finance charges of Rs.95,48,200/- confirmed by the ld.CIT(A) under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that the real estate companies of Kapil Group have been accepting advance for sales of residential / commercial office space by entering into an MOU with potential