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)

disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) of an amount of Rs.44,24,840/- 4. Any other grounds which the Assessee may urge either before or at the time of the hearing.” 44. Coming back to Assessment Year 2019-20, the first issue that came up for our consideration from Ground No. 2 of the assessee’s appeal is addition

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)

disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) of an amount of Rs.44,24,840/- 4. Any other grounds which the Assessee may urge either before or at the time of the hearing.” 44. Coming back to Assessment Year 2019-20, the first issue that came up for our consideration from Ground No. 2 of the assessee’s appeal is addition

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)

disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) of an amount of Rs.44,24,840/- 4. Any other grounds which the Assessee may urge either before or at the time of the hearing.” 44. Coming back to Assessment Year 2019-20, the first issue that came up for our consideration from Ground No. 2 of the assessee’s appeal is addition

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 shall not exceed the exempt Page 20 of 22 ITA No. 385 & 386/Hyd/2015 income that is earned during the year under consideration, it is in consonance with the settled principles of law. We, therefore, while accepting the contention of the assessee, direct the learned Assessing Officer to recompute

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 shall not exceed the exempt Page 20 of 22 ITA No. 385 & 386/Hyd/2015 income that is earned during the year under consideration, it is in consonance with the settled principles of law. We, therefore, while accepting the contention of the assessee, direct the learned Assessing Officer to recompute

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 shall not exceed the exempt Page 20 of 22 ITA No. 385 & 386/Hyd/2015 income that is earned during the year under consideration, it is in consonance with the settled principles of law. We, therefore, while accepting the contention of the assessee, direct the learned Assessing Officer to recompute

SRI RAMA AGRI GENETICS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,KURNOOL vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

46,91,790/- by making additions of Rs. 8,77,278/- towards disallowance of interest on TDS and further disallowance of EPF & ESI under Section

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

disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.4,63,82,272/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 46

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

disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.4,63,82,272/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 46

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

disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.4,63,82,272/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 46

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

disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.4,63,82,272/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 46

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

disallowed the interest debited under finance charges and carried forward to work-in-progress amounting to Rs.4,63,82,272/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 46

UNION BANK OF INDIA (ERSTWHILE-ANDHRA BANK),MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

disallowance of penalty paid to RBI for violation of section 46(4) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 for deviation

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), HYDERABAD vs. BHAGYANAGAR INDIA LIMITED , SECUNDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1200/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-17) Income Tax Officer, M/S. Bhagyanagar India Ward-1(3), Hyderabad. Vs. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan:Aaacb8963C (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Narender Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 24/07/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 08/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M. : This Appeal Is Filed By Revenue, Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 16.05.2019 For The A.Y. 2016-17. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

disallowance of Rs.75,59,818/- made under Section 14A of the Act is directed to be deleted and the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is upheld. 13. As far as the deletion of Rs.2,22,94,090/- is concerned, we have gone through para no.46A of AS-11 which is to the following effect : “ 46A. (1) In respect

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

disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA amounting to Rs.24,35,05,411/-. The company is engaged in the business of manufacturing of cement and generation of power. Power generated is being used for manufacturing cement and the profits earned from Power Divisions are claimed as deduction U/s 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The company has power generation units established

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Sood(Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1083/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Vs. Penna Cement Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcp2290D (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Industries आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1084/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year:2018-19) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hydeabad. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Vs. Penna Cement Industries Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcp2290D (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) करदाताकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Sourabh Soparkar, Advocate राजस्वकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाईसमाप्तहोनेकीतिथि/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 11/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 2

disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA amounting to Rs.24,35,05,411/-. The company is engaged in the business of manufacturing of cement and generation of power. Power generated is being used for manufacturing cement and the profits earned from Power Divisions are claimed as deduction U/s 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The company has power generation units established

ASIAN INSTITUTE OF GASTROENTEROLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both the assessment years 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 are allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

46,018/- and has not made any suo motu disallowance of expenditure relatable to exempt 17 ITA.Nos.609 & 610/Hyd./2025 income. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued specific notice under section

SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी प्रत्‍यर्थी / Ita No. / A.Y. / Appellant / Respondent

46. Ground No.5 of assessee’s appeal is an alternative ground to ground No.3 above, according to which the disallowance of Rs.1,15,00,000/- Page 25 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining Limited, batch qualify for deduction under section