ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. MEGHA ENGINEERING AND INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Ble & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Hon’Bleassessment Year – 2020-21 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S.Megha Engineering & Infrastructure Ltd. Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaecm7627A

D E R PER MANJUNATHA G. A.M. This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 12, Hyderabad passed on 15.07.2019 for the assessment year 2016- 17. 2 2. The grounds raised by the Revenue read as under : “1) The ld. CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts

ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCC HES JV, MADHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

disallowing the deduction under Section 80-IA of the Act. For the above-mentioned purposes, ld.AR has drawn our attention to the Explanation below Sub-section (4) of 80IA of the Act, which was captured by the Assessing Officer at page 10 of his assessment order, which reads as under : “…..The assessee’s claim is that its case falls

SABIR , SEW & PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

disallowance of the claim under Section 80IA\nafter the search proceedings carried out on the searched person\nwhen no incriminating material was found disclosing the\nescapement of income as required u/s 153C of the Act.\n8.\nPer contra, Ld.DR submitted that in the present case, the search\nwas carried out in the premises of the searched person on\n06.11.2017

SABIR, SEW 7 PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

disallowance of the claim under Section 80IA\nafter the search proceedings carried out on the searched person\nwhen no incriminating material was found disclosing the\nescapement of income as required u/s 153C of the Act.\n\n8.\nPer contra, Ld.DR submitted that in the present case, the search\nwas carried out in the premises of the searched person on\n06.11.2017

SABIR, SEW & PRASAD JV,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

disallowance of the claim under Section 80IA\nafter the search proceedings carried out on the searched person\nwhen no incriminating material was found disclosing the\nescapement of income as required u/s 153C of the Act.\n\n8. Per contra, Ld.DR submitted that in the present case, the search\nwas carried out in the premises of the searched person on\n06.11.2017

ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCC HES JV, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

disallowing the deduction under\nSection 80-IA of the Act. For the above-mentioned purposes, ld.AR\nhas drawn our attention to the Explanation below Sub-section (4)\nof 80IA of the Act, which was captured by the Assessing Officer at\npage 10 of his assessment order, which reads as under :\n“.....The assessee's claim is that its case

ACIT., CIRCLE-9(1), HYDERABAD vs. RANGAREDDY DIST JUDL EMPLOYEE MUTUALLY AIDED CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY, HYDERABAD

section 80P(4) of the Act. Thus, the AO held that the\nappellant does not qualify for the deductions u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) and disallowed the claim\namounting to Rs.1,04,92,276/-.\n5.3.2 The AO also disallowed the deduction u/s 80P(2)(d

BRIJESH CHANDWANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE -6(1), HYDERABAD

d) of section 148A of the Act has been passed in such case vide DIN ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1051563421(1) dated 29/03/2023 and annexed herewith for reference, 2. I, therefore, propose to assess or reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for the Assessment Year 2016-17 and I, hereby, require

PATEL SEW JOINT VENTURE,TELANGANA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

D E R PER MANJUNATHA G., A.M : The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Addl/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai dated 27.03.2025, pertaining to the A.Y. 2019-20 and the appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the learned Addl/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai dated 06.02.2025, pertaining

ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD vs. PATEL SEW JOINTVENTURE, HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

D E R PER MANJUNATHA G., A.M : The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Addl/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai dated 27.03.2025, pertaining to the A.Y. 2019-20 and the appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the learned Addl/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai dated 06.02.2025, pertaining

BRIJESH CHANDWANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE -6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2020-2021 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1527 & 1528/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years – 2016-2017 & 2020-2021 Brijesh Chandwani The Dcit, Circle-6(1), Vs. Hyderabad – 500 034 Hyderabad. Pan Adkpc1537H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Pawan Kumar Chakrapani राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Ar

d) on 29.03.2023, wherein, the AO has recorded that, despite sufficient time allowed to the assessee in accordance with the provisions of section 148A(b) for compliance to the show cause notice dated 21.02.2023, there is no compliance on behalf of the assessee to the said show cause notice. The AO decided that it is a fit case for issue

ADP PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD, TELANGANA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD, TELANGANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations given hereinabove

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

disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia), and addition towards Form 26AS mismatch. 6. Aggrieved by the final assessment order, the assessee is now in appeal before us. 7. The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri Sriram Seshadri, C.A., referring to the final assessment order passed by the A.O. under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B dated 06.12.2024, submitted

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)

D E R PER MANJUNATHA G., A.M : These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 11, Hyderabad, dated 11.01.2023, pertains to the assessment years 2017-18 to 2019-20. Since common issues are involved in all these three appeals, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed

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)

D E R PER MANJUNATHA G., A.M : These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 11, Hyderabad, dated 11.01.2023, pertains to the assessment years 2017-18 to 2019-20. Since common issues are involved in all these three appeals, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed

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)

D E R PER MANJUNATHA G., A.M : These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 11, Hyderabad, dated 11.01.2023, pertains to the assessment years 2017-18 to 2019-20. Since common issues are involved in all these three appeals, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed

NETCRACKER TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE - 5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations given hereinabove

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

d) of Section 92C(3) of the Act were satisfied. 3 NetCracker Technology Solutions (India) Private Limited, 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and contrary to law, the Ld. AO/Ld. TPO erred in and the Hon'ble DRP further erred in upholding/confirming the action of the Ld. AO/Ld. TPO in benchmarking outstanding receivables from

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang, Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

D E R PER MANJUNATHA G., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This Special Bench is constituted by the President by posing the following questions for our consideration and decision: “(i) Whether an assessee can make a claim for deduction under Chapter VIA of Income Tax Act, :2: ITA Nos. 1717 to 1720/Hyd/2017 & 1961, for the first time, in the return of income filed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. TRACKS & TOWERS INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED(PART IX), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

disallowed the claim of deduction to the tune 4 Tracks & Towers Infratech Pvt.Ltd. (Part IX) of Rs. 12,60,23,062/- under 80IA of the Act claimed in the revised return and made addition of the same to the total income of the assessee. 6. The AO further made addition of Rs. 2,67,611/- on account of belated