SRIDHAR REDDY BAYAPU,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

section 54, therefore, erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 70,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer. 4. The Learned

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

section 80G in respect of CSR expenditure incurred by the assessee company. 48. Ostensibly, the AO had disallowed the claim for deduction under section 80G in respect of CSR expenditure incurred by the assessee company, on the ground that CSR expenditure is mandatory and hence donations made therefrom cannot be regarded as voluntary. 49. On appeal, the CIT(Appeals

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

section 14A of the Act could be made. In this regard, we have gone through the para no. 4 of the order of the Ld. AO, which is to the following effect :\n4/1\nIt is observed from the Balance Sheet that the assessee-company has investments to the tune of Rs.2,43,34,65,000/- as on 31.03.2016. During

DCIT., (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERABAD vs. SYAMA REDDY MALI REDDY, HYDERABAD

Section 54 of\nthe Act. He, accordingly, computed the long term capital gain, after\ngranting benefit of indexation on cost of acquisition and cost of\nimprovement, at Rs.45,36,273/-. While examining the question of capital\ngains, the Assessing Officer also disallowed

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

disallowance of Rs.2,03,752/- made by the\nAssessing Officer was in order\"\n\"15. Income exempt under Section 10 in a particular assessment year, may not\nhave been exempt earlier and can become taxable in future years. Further,\nwhether Income earned in a subsequent year would or would not be taxable, may depend upon the nature of transaction entered

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

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 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS. Therefore, he submitted that, the addition made by the A.O. should be deleted. 54. The learned Senior A.R. for the Revenue, on the other hand, supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that, the A.O. has passed the order giving effect to the order

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 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS. Therefore, he submitted that, the addition made by the A.O. should be deleted. 54. The learned Senior A.R. for the Revenue, on the other hand, supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that, the A.O. has passed the order giving effect to the order

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 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS. Therefore, he submitted that, the addition made by the A.O. should be deleted. 54. The learned Senior A.R. for the Revenue, on the other hand, supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that, the A.O. has passed the order giving effect to the order

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 was raised against the disallowance of deduction u/s\n80IA amounting to Rs.24,35,05,411/-. The company is engaged in the\nbusiness of manufacturing of cement and generation

KAUSALYA AGRO FARMS AMD DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of our above findings

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. 10.4 As far as the other investments which are not covered in terms of commercial expediency, the assessee in his alternate plea has submitted that, the total impugned investment made by the assessee was Rs.12,72,54

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

section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\n4. Your Appellant submits that the CIT(A) as well as the Assessing Officer ignored the\nfact that the payments made to Singareni Educational Society in the past have been\nallowed as business expenditure u/s 37, ought not to have disallowed Rs.\n41,08,54

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

In the result, assessee's appeals for the A

Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\n4. Your Appellant submits that the CIT(A) as well as the Assessing Officer ignored the\nfact that the payments made to Singareni Educational Society in the past have been\nallowed as business expenditure u/s 37, ought not to have disallowed Rs.\n41,08,54

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE2-(2), HYDERABAD vs. SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED, 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

54,27,201/-. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act on 25/03/2016 and the deduction claimed under section 80-lA of the Act was disallowed

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

54,27,201/-. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act on 25/03/2016 and the deduction claimed under section 80-lA of the Act was disallowed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE2-(2), HYDERABAD vs. SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED, 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

54,27,201/-. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act on 25/03/2016 and the deduction claimed under section 80-lA of the Act was disallowed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE2-(2), HYDERABAD vs. SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED, 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

54,27,201/-. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act on 25/03/2016 and the deduction claimed under section 80-lA of the Act was disallowed

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

54,27,201/-. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act on 25/03/2016 and the deduction claimed under section 80-lA of the Act was disallowed

SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2(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

54,27,201/-. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act on 25/03/2016 and the deduction claimed under section 80-lA of the Act was disallowed