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

5) of section 135 of the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013) as provided under section 80G(2)(iiihk) and section 80G(2)(iiihl), respectively. Elaborating further on his contention, the Ld. AR submitted that as the claim of the assessee company for deduction under section 80G was not in respect of any CSR related donations made towards either

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

5) of section 135 of the Companies Act, 2013\n(18 of 2013) as provided under section 80G(2)(iiihk) and section\n80G(2)(iiihl), respectively. Elaborating further on his contention, the Ld.\nAR submitted that as the claim of the assessee company for deduction\nunder section 80G was not in respect of any CSR related donations\nmade towards either

THERMODYNE DYNAMICS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -17(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us :

B. Balakrishna -CIT- DR Represented by सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date of : 14.05.2025 Conclusion of Hearing घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement : 03.07.2025 O R D E R प्रनत रवीश सूद, जे.एम./PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M. The present appeal filed by the assessee company is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax 2 Thermodyne

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

B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA-IT No. 369/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Prasanth Nandanuru, Vs. The Income Tax Officer Hyderabad (INT TAXN)-2, [PAN : ACQPN6612H] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri Hiten Chande, AR रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Shri Jeevan

ASST. DIRECTOR OF IT (EXEMP)-II,, HYDERABAD vs. ACTION FOR WELFARE AND AWAKENING IN RURAL ENVIRONMENT (AWARE), HYDERABAD

In the result, the C.O. filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.709/Hyd/2012 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:1995-96) Asst. Director Of Income Tax Vs. Action For Welfare & (Exemptions)-Ii, Awakening In Rural Hyderabad. Environment (Aware), Shantivanam, Nagarjuna Sagar Road, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaata2338R (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.138/Hyd/2012 (In आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.709/Hyd/2012) ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:1995-96) Asst. Director Of Income Tax Vs. Action For Welfare & (Exemptions)-Ii, Awakening In Rural Hyderabad. Environment (Aware), Pragati Bhavan, D.No.5-9- 24/78, Lake Hill Road, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad- 500463. Pan: Aaata2338R (Respondent/Cross Objector) (Appellant In Appeal) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "वारा/Revenue By:: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 08/01/2026 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pronouncement: 13/02/2026

disallowing the exemption claimed by the assessee u/s.11. 7. The decision the CIT(A) is erroneous both in facts and in law that the A.O. denied exemption against the income earned for the A.Ys. 1991-92, 1992-93 and 1994-95 and accordingly, the same can not be considered as accumulation u/s.11(2) of the 1.T.Act. The Id.CIT(A) failed

PRABHAKAR REDDY BASIREDDY, NALGONDA vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

5. Further, the AO disallowed the assessee’s claim for deduction under section 80C of the Act of Rs. 66,982/-. 6. Accordingly, the AO vide his order under section 147 of the Act, dated 26/03/2025, determined the income of the assessee at Rs. 8,35,157/-. 7. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before

PRABHAKAR REDDY BASIREDDY, NALGONDA vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1) , HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

5. Further, the AO disallowed the assessee’s claim for deduction under section 80C of the Act of Rs. 66,982/-. 6. Accordingly, the AO vide his order under section 147 of the Act, dated 26/03/2025, determined the income of the assessee at Rs. 8,35,157/-. 7. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before

RASHID HUSSAIN,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

2) of the Act. 6. Thereafter, the AO vide his order passed under section 147 of the Act, dated 06/03/2025 determined the income of the assessee at Rs.37,03,180/- after making certain additions/disallowances, viz., (i) disallowance of the assessee’s claim for deduction under section 80C of the Act: Rs.1,50,000/-; and (ii) disallowance of the assessee

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

2) of section 33, sub-section (4) of section 35 or the second proviso to clause (ix) of sub- section (1) of section 36, as the case may be, shall not apply in relation to any such allowance or deduction; (ii) no loss referred to in sub-section (1) of section 72 or sub- section (1) or sub-section

KRISHNA KISHORE REDDY MANYAM ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(4) , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed\nfor statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

disallowed the same.\n5. Ostensibly, the assessee during the course of the assessment\nproceedings came up with a new claim, wherein based on a revised\nstatement of computation of income that was filed with the A.O.\non 29.08.2010, it was claimed by him that as the agricultural land\nsituated at Village: Manchirevula was not a “capital asset” within\nthe meaning

DIABETOMICS MEDICAL PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

5% is\ntaken. Again, it is an assumption. It is imperative to\n53\nITA.Nos.2147, 2148 and 2149/Hyd./2025\nunderstand that growth rate should be correlated with the\ndate of valuation and the industry in which the appellant is\noperating as on the date of valuation. The CAGR for the\nsector of beauty products is less than 4% especially

DIABETOMICS MEDICAL PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

5% is\ntaken. Again, it is an assumption. It is imperative to\n52\nITA.Nos.2147, 2148 and 2149/Hyd./2025\nunderstand that growth rate should be correlated with the\ndate of valuation and the industry in which the appellant is\noperating as on the date of valuation. The CAGR for the\nsector of beauty products is less than 4% especially

DIABETOMICS MEDICAL PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the Assessee\nare partly allowed

5% is\ntaken. Again, it is an assumption. It is imperative to\n53\nITA.Nos.2147, 2148 and 2149/Hyd./2025\nunderstand that growth rate should be correlated with the\ndate of valuation and the industry in which the appellant is\noperating as on the date of valuation. The CAGR for the\nsector of beauty products is less than 4% especially

MSN LIFE SCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR.\nDate of hearing: 23.12.2024\nDate of pronouncement: 04.02.2025\nORDER\nPER BENCH :\nThe appeals of the assessee for A.Ys.2013-14, 2014-15, 2019-20 and 2020-21 arise from the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 12, dated 22.08.2024, dt.27.09.2014 dt.13.09.2024 and dt.19.08.2024, respectively. The Revenue filed cross appeal

MSN LIFE SCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR.\nDate of hearing: 23.12.2024\nDate of pronouncement: 04.02.2025\nORDER\nPER BENCH :\nThe appeals of the assessee for A.Ys.2013-14, 2014-15, 2019-20 and 2020-21 arise from the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 12, dated 22.08.2024, dt.27.09.2014 dt.13.09.2024 and dt.19.08.2024, respectively. The Revenue filed cross appeal

SANGHI TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERBAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

B’ Bench, Hyderabad "ी रवीश सूद, माननीय "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मधुसूदन साव"डया, माननीय लेखा सद"य SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1311/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2014-15) Sanghi Textiles Private VS. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-3(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN: AADCS0837P (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. SRI CHAITANYA EDUCATIONAL COMMITTE, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

5 ITA.No.325/Hyd./2023 employees for teaching and non-teaching staff, provision of content curriculum and related services, management of all the administrative activities of the colleges/institutions etc. The services to be provided by the above Trust is part of Annexure-1 of agreement which was reproduced by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order. Further, in pursuance

DELOITTEE TAX SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा / अपीलधर्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / / ITA-TP No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Deputy Deloitte Tax Services Commissioner of India Private Limited, 341/Hyd/2023 2018-19 Income Tax, Hyderabad Circle-8(1), [PAN: AABCD9771F] Hyderabad Deloitte & Touche Deputy Assurance & Commissioner of Enterprise Risk 342/Hyd/2023 2018-19 Income

DELOITTE & TOUCHE ASSURANCE & ENTERPRISE RISK SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा / अपीलधर्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / / ITA-TP No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Deputy Deloitte Tax Services Commissioner of India Private Limited, 341/Hyd/2023 2018-19 Income Tax, Hyderabad Circle-8(1), [PAN: AABCD9771F] Hyderabad Deloitte & Touche Deputy Assurance & Commissioner of Enterprise Risk 342/Hyd/2023 2018-19 Income