OPTUM GLOBAL SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

disallowed and added back in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. In terms of Section 135(5) of the Act read with Section 80G

OPTUM GLOBAL SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

disallowed and added back in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. In terms of Section 135(5) of the Act read with Section 80G

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

disallowed and added back in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. In terms of Section 135(5) of the Act read with Section 80G

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

disallowed and added back in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. In terms of Section 135(5) of the Act read with Section 80G

POWER MECH PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

disallowed and added back in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. In terms of Section 135(5) of the Act read with Section 80G

HSBC ELECTRONIC DATA PROCESSING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.302/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Hsbc Electronic Data Processing Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Hyderabad Circle-2(1) [Pan : Aaach8235M] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

disallowance of deduction under section 80G of the Act and the second issue is in respect of non-grant of excess Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT). On the aspect of 80G of the Act learned CIT(A) noted that on verification of the copy of 80G of the Act certificate for deduction under section 80G(5

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. HSBC ELECTRONIC DATA PROCESSING INDIA PVT. LTD.,, MADHAPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.302/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Hsbc Electronic Data Processing Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Hyderabad Circle-2(1) [Pan : Aaach8235M] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

disallowance of deduction under section 80G of the Act and the second issue is in respect of non-grant of excess Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT). On the aspect of 80G of the Act learned CIT(A) noted that on verification of the copy of 80G of the Act certificate for deduction under section 80G(5

NETCRACKER TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE - 5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations given hereinabove

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

disallowance of CSR expenditure claimed under Section 80G of the Act. The Ld. DRP vide its directions issued under Section 144C(5

ADP PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD, TELANGANA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD, TELANGANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations given hereinabove

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

80G, the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia), and the addition on account of mismatch with Form 26AS. The Ld. DRP, vide its directions issued under Section 144C(5

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

80G and\n80GGB], the deduction u/sec.80IA is allowable to the extent\nof Rs.43,04,93,491/- only and the balance amount of\nRs.5,58,33,404/- is disallowed u/sec.80IA of the Act and\nmade the addition accordingly and assessed the total\nincome of the assessee at Rs.5,58,33,404/- vide order dated\n31.03.2016 passed u/sec.143(3) r.w.s.153A

ZAHEER AHMED SYED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CC-2(2), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

5. The first issue that came up for our consideration from Ground No. 2 of assessee's appeal is disallowance of claim of deduction under Section 80G

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result appeals filed by the Revenue\nITA

80G and\n80GGB], the deduction u/sec.80IA is allowable to the extent\nof Rs.43,04,93,491/- only and the balance amount of\nRs.5,58,33,404/- is disallowed u/sec.80IA of the Act and\nmade the addition accordingly and assessed the total\nincome of the assessee at Rs.5,58,33,404/- vide order dated\n31.03.2016 passed u/sec.143(3) r.w.s.153A

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

80G and\n80GGB], the deduction u/sec.80IA is allowable to the extent\nof Rs.43,04,93,491/- only and the balance amount of\nRs.5,58,33,404/- is disallowed u/sec.80IA of the Act and\nmade the addition accordingly and assessed the total\nincome of the assessee at Rs.5,58,33,404/- vide order dated\n31.03.2016 passed u/sec.143(3) r.w.s.153A

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

80G and\n80GGB], the deduction u/sec.80IA is allowable to the extent\nof Rs.43,04,93,491/- only and the balance amount of\nRs.5,58,33,404/- is disallowed u/sec.80IA of the Act and\nmade the addition accordingly and assessed the total\nincome of the assessee at Rs.5,58,33,404/- vide order dated\n31.03.2016 passed u/sec.143(3) r.w.s.153A

BRIGHTCOM GROUP LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

80G of the Act, which is a distinct and independent provision. They do not lay down any proposition that CSR expenditure is allowable under section 37(1) in view of the statutory prohibition contained in Explanation 2. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the action of the Ld. AO in disallowing the claim of Rs.18,72,836/- towards CSR expenditure

ANDHRA PRADESH BEVERAGES CORPORATION LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

disallowance of leave encashment,\nPF, SF, GF and other donation etc.\n7.\nAggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the\nassessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal.\n8.\nThe first issue that came-up for consideration\nfrom ground nos.1 to 3 of assessee's appeal for the\n assessment year 2014-2015 is validity of assessment order

SEW FOUNDATION,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.499/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sew Foundation Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad (Exemptions), Ward 1(4) Pan:Aaats7433H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate V Siva Kumar राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Vinodh Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27/01/2025 Of The Learned Cit (A)/Addl/Jcit(A)-1 Coimbatore, For The A.Y.2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Learned Cit (A)/Addl/Jcit(A)-5 Coimbatore, 27-01-2025 Is Erroneous, Contrary To Law & Facts Of The Case.

80G were available in return of income. The learned CIT (A) further ought to have seen that Appellant’s accounts were audited by C.A whose details are furnished in the return of income. Hence, , denying exemption u/s 11 to the Appellant and restricting corpus donations of Rs.28,73,338/- by the Assessing Officer is not justified on the ground that

INVESCO(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2 (1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

disallowance offered by the Appellant in its return of income and the Hon'ble 6 ITA.No.111/Hyd./2022 DRP further erred in upholding the said action of the Ld. AO. 5. Without prejudice to Grounds 4 & 5 above, that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred