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

Bench: Us :

disallowing Rs. 15,75,000/-under section 14A of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in making the addition of an amount being Rs. 18,03,62,857/- under section 56

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

disallowance u/s 14A is as under:\nMonth\nOpening Investment\n(In Rs.)\nClosing Investment\n(In Rs.)\nAverage Investment\n(In Rs.)\nApril, 2016\n208,03,64,000\n352,65,48,000\n280,34,56,000\nMay, 2016\n352,65,48,000\n352,65,48,000\n352,65,48,000\nJune, 2016\n352,65,48,000\n352

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

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

section 56(2)(viib) to the venture\ncaptial undertaking receiving consideration from specified funds,\nthe said addition of Rs.46,24,57,170/-made by the Lil. AO is,\ntherefore, unwarranted and deserves to be deleted.\nSimilarly, as regards to the amount of disallowance

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

section 56(2)(viib) to the venture\ncaptal undertaking receiving consideration from specified funds,\nthe said addition of Rs.46,24,57,170/-made by the Ld. AO is,\ntherefore, unwarranted and deserves to be deleted.\nSimilarly, as regards to the amount of disallowance

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

section 56(2)(viib) to the venture\ncapital undertaking receiving consideration from specified funds,\nthe said addition of Rs.46,24,57,170/-made by the Lil. AO is,\ntherefore, unwarranted and deserves to be deleted.\nSimilarly, as regards to the amount of disallowance

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

disallowance u/s 14A is as under:\nMonth\nOpening Investment\n(In Rs.)\nClosing Investment\n(In Rs.)\nAverage Investment\n(In Rs.)\nApril, 2016\n208,03,64,000\n352,65,48,000\n280,34,56,000\nMay, 2016\n352,65,48,000\n352,65,48,000\n352,65,48,000\nJune, 2016\n352,65,48,000\n352

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 of ‘site expenses’ of Rs. 44,24,840/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS under Section 194C of the Act. 56

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 of ‘site expenses’ of Rs. 44,24,840/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS under Section 194C of the Act. 56

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 of ‘site expenses’ of Rs. 44,24,840/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS under Section 194C of the Act. 56

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

56,67,561/- by making addition towards disallowance of finance charges, disallowance under Section 14A of the Act and disallowance

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

56,67,561/- by making addition towards disallowance of finance charges, disallowance under Section 14A of the Act and disallowance

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

56,67,561/- by making addition towards disallowance of finance charges, disallowance under Section 14A of the Act and disallowance

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

56,67,561/- by making addition towards disallowance of finance charges, disallowance under Section 14A of the Act and disallowance

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

56,67,561/- by making addition towards disallowance of finance charges, disallowance under Section 14A of the Act and disallowance

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:

Section 14A of the Act. These disallowances led to an addition of Rs.81,96,987/- to the gross total income of Rs.41,59,816/-, thereby computing the gross total income at Rs.1,23,56

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

section 80-IA(4) of the Act on account of the disallowance of the same. 47. Now coming to Ground No.4 of assessee’s appeal, it relates to the addition of sub contract payment of Rs.2,56

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

section 80-IA(4) of the Act on account of the disallowance of the same. 47. Now coming to Ground No.4 of assessee’s appeal, it relates to the addition of sub contract payment of Rs.2,56

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

section 80-IA(4) of the Act on account of the disallowance of the same. 47. Now coming to Ground No.4 of assessee’s appeal, it relates to the addition of sub contract payment of Rs.2,56