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 the claim of 80IA as the assessee was not the owner of the infrastructural facilities laid / installed / created by it. In fact, the owner of the said infrastructural facilities were

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 the claim of 80IA as the assessee was not the owner of the infrastructural facilities laid / installed / created by it. In fact, the owner of the said infrastructural facilities were

SANGHI INDUSTRIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -3 (1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

2) of the Act was issued on 26/11/2019 and subsequent notice / questionnaire was also issued on 29/12/2020. In response, the assessee filed its submissions on 23/10/2020 and 12/12/2020. Thereafter, on 11/01/2021 a detailed show-cause notice was issued to the assessee U/s. 92C(3) of the Act. In reply, the assessee furnished the details as called for vide its letter

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang, Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

80A(5) of the Act and fresh claim can be made towards deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Act. He further referring to the provisions of Section 80AC submitted that as per the said provision, no deduction under Section 80IA shall be allowed to assessee unless he furnishes a return of income for such assessment year on or before

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), HYDERBAD vs. SEW INFRASTUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

2) of the Act was issued and assessment was not completed. Therefore, in view of the second proviso to Section 153A of the said Act, once assessment got abated, it meant that it was open for both the parties, i.e. the assessee as well as revenue to make claims for allowance or to make disallowance, as the case

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. NSL RENEWABLE POWER PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

80A of the Act provides that the aggregate amount of the deductions under Chapter VI-A shall not exceed the ‘gross total income’ of the Assessee. We are in agreement with the Appellate Authority that Section NSL Renewable Power Pvt. Ltd., Hyd. 80AB of the Act which deals with determination of deductions under Part C of Chapter

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. NSL RENEWABLE POWER PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

80A of the Act provides that the aggregate amount of the deductions under Chapter VI-A shall not exceed the ‘gross total income’ of the Assessee. We are in agreement with the Appellate Authority that Section NSL Renewable Power Pvt. Ltd., Hyd. 80AB of the Act which deals with determination of deductions under Part C of Chapter

VITP PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE8(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.573 & 574/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Vitp Private Limited Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 8 (1) Pan:Aaccv2672G Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Advocates Percy Perdiwala & Mahima Goud राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By:: Shri Shahnawaz-Ul-Rahman, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 23/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 08/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: These Two Appeals Are Filed By Vitp Private Limited (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Hyderabad, (“Ld.Pcit”), Dated 30/03/2024 For The A.Y.2017-18. As Both The Appeals Are Interrelated & Belongs To The Same, Both Are Heard Together & One Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Brevity.

disallowed. This excess WDV resuted in excess claim of depreciation of Rs.3,37,71,787/-. 4 ITA Nos 573 and 5754 of 2024 VIP Private Limited ii. As per Schedule CYLA of ITR of AY 2017-18 (page 47), the assessee has a business income of Rs 7,42,25,071/-, short term capital gain

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

2 of assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 59. Ground No.3 raised by the assessee and Grounds No. 3 & 4 of Revenue relate to the order of the learned CIT(A) in granting part relief to the assessee by confirming the disallowance of expenses of Rs.89,69,768/- Page 31 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining

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

2 of assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 59. Ground No.3 raised by the assessee and Grounds No. 3 & 4 of Revenue relate to the order of the learned CIT(A) in granting part relief to the assessee by confirming the disallowance of expenses of Rs.89,69,768/- Page 31 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining

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

2 of assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 59. Ground No.3 raised by the assessee and Grounds No. 3 & 4 of Revenue relate to the order of the learned CIT(A) in granting part relief to the assessee by confirming the disallowance of expenses of Rs.89,69,768/- Page 31 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining

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

2 of assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 59. Ground No.3 raised by the assessee and Grounds No. 3 & 4 of Revenue relate to the order of the learned CIT(A) in granting part relief to the assessee by confirming the disallowance of expenses of Rs.89,69,768/- Page 31 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining

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

2 of assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 59. Ground No.3 raised by the assessee and Grounds No. 3 & 4 of Revenue relate to the order of the learned CIT(A) in granting part relief to the assessee by confirming the disallowance of expenses of Rs.89,69,768/- Page 31 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining

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

2 of assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 59. Ground No.3 raised by the assessee and Grounds No. 3 & 4 of Revenue relate to the order of the learned CIT(A) in granting part relief to the assessee by confirming the disallowance of expenses of Rs.89,69,768/- Page 31 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining

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

2 of assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 59. Ground No.3 raised by the assessee and Grounds No. 3 & 4 of Revenue relate to the order of the learned CIT(A) in granting part relief to the assessee by confirming the disallowance of expenses of Rs.89,69,768/- Page 31 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining

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

2 of assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 59. Ground No.3 raised by the assessee and Grounds No. 3 & 4 of Revenue relate to the order of the learned CIT(A) in granting part relief to the assessee by confirming the disallowance of expenses of Rs.89,69,768/- Page 31 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining

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

2 of assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 59. Ground No.3 raised by the assessee and Grounds No. 3 & 4 of Revenue relate to the order of the learned CIT(A) in granting part relief to the assessee by confirming the disallowance of expenses of Rs.89,69,768/- Page 31 of 37 M/s. Sushee Infra & Mining

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

80A(5), 80AC and 139(1) and noted that provisions of section 80AC make it mandatory to file the return of income within the time allowed under sub-section (1) of section 139, in absence of which the assessee will not be entitled for deductions under section 80IA. According to the AO, the assessee cannot claim the deduction under Chapter