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

section 80A(5) r.w.s. 80AC. The AO while disallowing the claim also observed that the appellant is a works contractor

DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. DBS TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Dbs Technology Income Tax, Services India Private Circle – 8(1), Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aafcd5584N (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No.2/Hyd/2023 Assessment Year 2019-20 Dbs Technology Services India Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Circle – 8(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aafcd5584N (Cross Objector / (Appellant/Revenue) Respondent) Assessee By: Sri M. P. Lohia, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.07.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, Jm: The Appeal & Cross-Objection Filed By The Revenue For A.Y. 2019-20 Arise From The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi

disallowing the claim of exemption of Rs.100,20,63,008 under section 10AA of the Act in the intimation issued under section 143(1) of the Act, basis which relief was granted by the ld.CIT(A) and accordingly, the order of ld.CIT(A) should be upheld.” 5

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

disallowance of the claim\nof the assessee company for deduction under section 80G of the Act of\nRs. 1.88 crore (approx) by following the decision of the ITAT,\nHyd erabad in Optum Global Solutions (India) Private Limited Vs.\nDCIT Circle 5

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 80AC and 80A(5) in support of the case of the revenue. 7.1. Further, it was submitted by the ld. DR that the Assessing Officer was correct in disallowing

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 80AC and 80A(5) in support of the case of the revenue. 7.1. Further, it was submitted by the ld. DR that the Assessing Officer was correct in disallowing

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 80AC and 80A(5) in support of the case of the revenue. 7.1. Further, it was submitted by the ld. DR that the Assessing Officer was correct in disallowing

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 80AC and 80A(5) in support of the case of the revenue. 7.1. Further, it was submitted by the ld. DR that the Assessing Officer was correct in disallowing

ACIT., CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD vs. SANDOR MEDICAIDS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeal of Revenue and Cross-Objection of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

5) of section 115BAA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for previous year 2020-21 and subsequent financial years i.e. FY 2021-22 onwards. The assessee has received a proposal for adjustment u/s 143(1)(a) on 14.12.2022 for Rs 15,11,380/- with regard to disallowance

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

5(1), Hyderabad Vs. Ushodaya Enterprises (P) Ltd.\nITA. NO. 1782/HYD/2025\nΑ.Υ. 2018-19\nAppellant Respondent\nWRITTEN SUBMISSIONS:\n1. The issue under present appeal is deduction allowed by the Hon. CIT(A) of Rs.2,09,08,248/- representing reversal of interest charged under section 234B/234C, which was disallowed

PRASANTH NANDANURU,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

5. Learned Assessing Officer, among other things, disallowed the exemption claimed by the assessee under article 16(1) of the DTAA and made an addition of Rs. 46,13,736/- on that score and passed the draft assessment order, holding that in as much as the assessee was under the payrolls of Wells India till his services were terminated here

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)

Section 69C of the Act. 31. The next issue that came up for our consideration from Ground No. 5 of the assessee’s appeal is 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)

Section 69C of the Act. 31. The next issue that came up for our consideration from Ground No. 5 of the assessee’s appeal is 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)

Section 69C of the Act. 31. The next issue that came up for our consideration from Ground No. 5 of the assessee’s appeal is disallowance

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

5(1), Hyderabad\nVs.\nAppellant\nUshodaya Enterprises (P) Ltd.\nITA. NO. 1782/HYD/2025\nΑ.Υ. 2018-19\nRespondent\nWRITTEN SUBMISSIONS:\n1. The issue under present appeal is deduction allowed by the Hon. CIT(A) of\nRs.2,09,08,248/- representing reversal of interest charged under Section 234B/234C, which\nwas disallowed

PRASAD FILM LABORATORIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under Section 14A read with rule 8D is bad in law, as the Learned Assessing Officer failed to record his dissatisfaction with regard to the correctness of the appellant's claim, as required under Section 14A(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961." 3 ITA.No.113/Hyd./2025 4. After hearing both the sides

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

5 of 11 ITA No 464 of 2025 Federation of AP Coop Urban Banks and Credit Societies the scope of adjustment under Section 143(1)(a)(v) was restricted to disallowance

DCIT, CIRCLE-13(1), HYDERABAD vs. THE SINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LIMITED, KOTHAGUDEM

5) would become\nfalsified and would stand to be nullified.\n11. Now so far as the reliance placed upon the decision of\nthis Court in the case of G.M. Knitting Industries Pvt.\nLtd. (supra), relied upon by the learned counsel appearing on\nbehalf of the assessee is concerned, Section 10B (8) is an\nexemption provision which cannot be compared with

SINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LIMITED,KOTHAGUDEM vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-13(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee's appeals for the A

5) would become\nfalsified and would stand to be nullified.\n11. Now so far as the reliance placed upon the decision of\nthis Court in the case of G.M. Knitting Industries Pvt.\nLtd. (supra), relied upon by the learned counsel appearing on\nbehalf of the assessee is concerned, Section 10B (8) is an\nexemption provision which cannot be compared with