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)

41,133/- booked by the assessee attracts the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, and accordingly, completed the assessment u/s. 153A by making addition of Rs. 13,02,340/- on account of disallowance

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)

41,133/- booked by the assessee attracts the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, and accordingly, completed the assessment u/s. 153A by making addition of Rs. 13,02,340/- on account of disallowance

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)

41,133/- booked by the assessee attracts the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, and accordingly, completed the assessment u/s. 153A by making addition of Rs. 13,02,340/- on account of disallowance

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

Section 234B/234C, which\nwas 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\ntowards the reversal of excess interest debited in earlier years, computed as under:\nSr\nInterest\nrelating\nto A.Y.\n(1)\n(2)\nInterest\nDetermined\non\n(3)\nInterest\ndebited

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

section 80G of the Act in respect of such donations which\nformed part of the spend towards CSR. Respectfully following the\njurisdictional tribunal, ground no 3 is allowed.\n5. Ground No.4 is raised against disallowance of business expenses\non estimate basis amounting to Rs.16,31,00,000/- on account of\ndeduction U/s 80IA. During the assessment proceedings, the AO\ncalled

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

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

disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules. He considered the decisions relied upon by the assessee viz-a-viz the CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2014 to reach a conclusion that when once there is an exempt income from the investments and there is a claim of interest expenses

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

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

disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules. He considered the decisions relied upon by the assessee viz-a-viz the CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2014 to reach a conclusion that when once there is an exempt income from the investments and there is a claim of interest expenses

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

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

disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules. He considered the decisions relied upon by the assessee viz-a-viz the CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2014 to reach a conclusion that when once there is an exempt income from the investments and there is a claim of interest expenses

SREE NAGENDRA CONSTRUCTIONS,,KHAMMAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

disallowance for responding\npurchases, no addition could be made under section\n68 inasmuch as it is not in dispute that the creditors'\noutstanding related to purchases and the trading results were\naccepted by the Assessing Officer.'\n\nviii) As regards applicability of provisions of section 41

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 amounting to Rs.95,48,200/-, which was confirmed by the ld.CIT(A). 40. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. ITA No.685/Hyd/2020 – A.Y. 2018-19 41. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a private limited company engaged in the business of construction and sale of residential

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 amounting to Rs.95,48,200/-, which was confirmed by the ld.CIT(A). 40. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. ITA No.685/Hyd/2020 – A.Y. 2018-19 41. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a private limited company engaged in the business of construction and sale of residential

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 amounting to Rs.95,48,200/-, which was confirmed by the ld.CIT(A). 40. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. ITA No.685/Hyd/2020 – A.Y. 2018-19 41. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a private limited company engaged in the business of construction and sale of residential

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 amounting to Rs.95,48,200/-, which was confirmed by the ld.CIT(A). 40. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. ITA No.685/Hyd/2020 – A.Y. 2018-19 41. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a private limited company engaged in the business of construction and sale of residential

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 amounting to Rs.95,48,200/-, which was confirmed by the ld.CIT(A). 40. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. ITA No.685/Hyd/2020 – A.Y. 2018-19 41. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a private limited company engaged in the business of construction and sale of residential

A.P. GRAMEENA VIKAS BANK,WARANGAL vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 41 are not applicable. 3. The Learned CIT(A) ought to have directed the Assessing Officer to verify whether the amount under consideration pertains to write-off or write back and once it is found that the amount pertains to write off, no addition to be made in this regard.” 3. As the facts and issues

A.P. GRAMEENA VIKAS BANK,WARANGAL vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 41 are not applicable. 3. The Learned CIT(A) ought to have directed the Assessing Officer to verify whether the amount under consideration pertains to write-off or write back and once it is found that the amount pertains to write off, no addition to be made in this regard.” 3. As the facts and issues

A.P. GRAMEENA VIKAS BANK,WARANGAL vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 41 are not applicable. 3. The Learned CIT(A) ought to have directed the Assessing Officer to verify whether the amount under consideration pertains to write-off or write back and once it is found that the amount pertains to write off, no addition to be made in this regard.” 3. As the facts and issues

A.P. GRAMEENA VIKAS BANK,WARANGAL vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 41 are not applicable. 3. The Learned CIT(A) ought to have directed the Assessing Officer to verify whether the amount under consideration pertains to write-off or write back and once it is found that the amount pertains to write off, no addition to be made in this regard.” 3. As the facts and issues