SHRI RAMPRIYA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1946/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Shri Rampriya Developers Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (P) Ltd Circle 3(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aajcs6629P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/08/2024 आदेश/Order

disallowance on borrowed fund to the extent of Rs.25,79,642/- without appreciating the fact that the investment in shares is not made for the purpose of dividend income and therefore, the provisions of section 14A have no application and therefore, the entire interest expenditure on borrowed fund amounting to Rs.35,60,747

GOOD TIMES LIQUOR STORE WINES,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 15.03.2024 and determined total income of Rs.1,72,89,747/- by inter alia making addition towards income from business and profession of Rs. 11,99,000/-, ad hoc disallowance

SUJATHA KANCHARLA,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 6(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

disallowing sundry creditors of an amount being of Rs.38,29,272/-, at 10%, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The Appellant denies herself liable to be charged to interest under section 234B of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, under the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed her return of income

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

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

disallowing the claim of the assessee u/s 54F, thereby determining the long term capital gains at Rs.7,58,13,772/- 3. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the assessing officer, assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who granted part relief to the assessee. 3 Smt. Syama Reddy Malireddy 4. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed

SKANDA BUILDERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

disallowance u/sec.40(a)(ia) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”], but, failed to give any\nspecific example of any expenditure which can be subjected to\nprovisions of sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act and also the decision of\njurisdictional High Court in the case of Indwell Construction\nvs., CIT [1998] 232 ITR 776 (A.P)held that

DESU ENTERPRISES,ONGOLE vs. ITO., WARD-1, ONGOLE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

disallowing\nthe grounds of the Appellant both -on facts of the case and in Law.\n2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/NFAC ought to have noticed\nthat the notice u/s 148 of the old law having been issued on 01.04.2021, the\nentire assessment proceedings consequent to such notice are bad in law in the\nlight of the decision

THALLA SRISAILAM GOUD,IBRAHIMPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

disallowing the grounds of the Appellant both -on facts of the case and in Law. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/NFAC ought to have noticed that the notice u/s 148 of the old law having been issued on 01.04.2021, the entire assessment proceedings consequent to such notice are bad in law in the light of the decision