VIGILANCE SECURITY SERVICES (P) LTD., SEC'BAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT (OSD), RANGE-3, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

Loss assessed - Rs. 4,72,070/- Tax thereon - Nil Calculation of tax on the income u/s. 115JB: Book Profit u/s. 115JB - Rs. 2,34,76,570 Tax thereon - Rs. 41,40,614 (+) Surcharge - Rs. 3,10,546 (+) EC & SHEC - Rs. 1,33,535 Tax - Rs. 45,84,695 (+) Interest u/s. 234A - Rs. 3,66,776 (+) Interest u/s. 234B

NITEN KUMAR GOEL,SECUNDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-10(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B. Ramakotaiah

set off of false brought forward losses and depreciation and had thereby furnished inaccurate particulars. AO found it to be a fit case for imposition of penalty and levied a minimum penalty of Rs. 2,97,476/- u/s. 271

USHA RANI KALIDINDI, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals under consideration are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2007-08

losses of Rs. 11,34,939/-. 11.1 When the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) and the ITAT, the assessee’s appeal was dismissed by both the authorities. 11.2 Thereafter, the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) and a notice was issued for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income with regard to bogus claim

K. BALA VISHNU RAJU, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals under consideration are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2007-08

losses of Rs. 11,34,939/-. 11.1 When the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) and the ITAT, the assessee’s appeal was dismissed by both the authorities. 11.2 Thereafter, the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) and a notice was issued for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income with regard to bogus claim

THE SECUNDERBAD CLUB ,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD -10(2), HYDERABAD

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

u/s. 2(45) of the Act, it would so applicable even in respect of negative income i.e. loss. 8.10 A detailed analysis of the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court (supra) is finding place in the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of DDIT (lnternational Taxation) Vs. Asia Pacific Performance SICAV [2015] 55 Taxmann.com 333 (Mum. Trib

DCIT,CIRCLE-17(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. DR. REDDY'S LABOURATORIES LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2006-07

penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) was passed on 31/05/2011 and this order was passed after the DRP order, which was passed on 30/09/2010. The assessee preferred appeal before ITAT and final order was passed on 08/08/2013. In the ITAT order, there were 13 issues and the same were adjudicated as below: S.No. Addition made by the AO DRP ITAT

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHITTOOR vs. G VIJAYASIMHA REDDY, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

loss as well as a chance of gain. " [Emphasis supplied] 14 The department submits that the revenue-sharing model of Joint Development being followed by the assessee is a composite arrangement wherein land is contributed by one party and the development being carried out by the other party with a clear understanding on sharing of the proceeds from sale

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

loss of Tax\nExemption to the appellant and that the appellant-trust\nbecomes liable to pay income tax on its earnings.\n3.3.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that when there\nis a valid registration granted to the assessee-trust,\nmaking it liable to pay income tax on its earnings is not\njustified.\n3.4.\nThe

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

loss of Tax\nExemption to the appellant and that the appellant-trust\nbecomes liable to pay income tax on its earnings.\n3.3.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that when there\nis a valid registration granted to the assessee-trust,\nmaking it liable to pay income tax on its earnings is not\njustified.\n3.4.\nThe

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

loss of Tax\nExemption to the appellant and that the appellant-trust\nbecomes liable to pay income tax on its earnings.\n3.3.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that when there\nis a valid registration granted to the assessee-trust,\nmaking it liable to pay income tax on its earnings is not\njustified.\n3.4.\nThe

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, three appeals i

loss of Tax\nExemption to the appellant and that the appellant-trust\nbecomes liable to pay income tax on its earnings.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that when there\nis a valid registration granted to the assessee-trust,\nmaking it liable to pay income tax on its earnings is not\njustified.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) ought

BS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST.COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14

setting up transmission lines and sub-stations. The company has two manufacturing facilities which are located near Hyderabad with an annual installed capacity of 2,40,000 MTPA. Company is certified with quality management (ISO 9001:2008), Environmental Management (ISO 14001:2004) and occupational Health and Safety (OHSAS 18001:2007) 2.2 International Transactions: As per 3CEB report/TP Document submitted

MADHUCON PROJECTS LTD, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

271(1)(c) of the Act. As the Assessing Officer not passed any order for levying penalty, this ground is preposterous and cannot be adjudicated. Dismissed accordingly. 41. In the result ITA No. 1970/Hyd/2011 and 1499/Hyd/2011 are partly allowed for statistical purposes. SA Nos. 83 and 84/ Hyd/2012 are dismissed as infructuous as we have already disposed of the appeals

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

271(1)(c) of the Act. As the Assessing Officer not passed any order for levying penalty, this ground is preposterous and cannot be adjudicated. Dismissed accordingly. 41. In the result ITA No. 1970/Hyd/2011 and 1499/Hyd/2011 are partly allowed for statistical purposes. SA Nos. 83 and 84/ Hyd/2012 are dismissed as infructuous as we have already disposed of the appeals

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

271(1)(c) of the Act. As the Assessing Officer not passed any order for levying penalty, this ground is preposterous and cannot be adjudicated. Dismissed accordingly. 41. In the result ITA No. 1970/Hyd/2011 and 1499/Hyd/2011 are partly allowed for statistical purposes. SA Nos. 83 and 84/ Hyd/2012 are dismissed as infructuous as we have already disposed of the appeals

GSS INFOTECH LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

loss incurred in form of advances written off should be allowed as business expenditure. 4.11 Ought to have appreciated the fact that the assessee has written off the amount in compliance with the accounting standard. 5. Erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1) (c) r.w.s 274, 271AA & 271BA of the Income Tax Act. The appellant may add, alter

GSS INFOTECH LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

loss incurred in form of advances written off should be allowed as business expenditure. 4.11 Ought to have appreciated the fact that the assessee has written off the amount in compliance with the accounting standard. 5. Erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1) (c) r.w.s 274, 271AA & 271BA of the Income Tax Act. The appellant may add, alter

S A BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS ,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2) , HYDERABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

sets of cross appeals are directed against\nthe two separate orders of the learned CIT (A)-12, Hyderabad both\ndated 29/04/2022, arising from the assessment framed u/s\n143(3) r.w.s.153A of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the A.Ys 2016-17 and\n2017-18 respectively. For the A.Y 2016-17, the assessee and the\nRevenue have raised the following grounds

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1) , HYDERABAD vs. S A BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS , HYDERABAD

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

sets of cross appeals are directed against\nthe two separate orders of the learned CIT (A)-12, Hyderabad both\ndated 29/04/2022, arising from the assessment framed u/s\n143(3) r.w.s.153A of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the A.Ys 2016-17 and\n2017-18 respectively. For the A.Y 2016-17, the assessee and the\nRevenue have raised the following grounds