NAVAYUGA ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of the said Chapter - VI A under the heading "C.-Deduction in respect of certain incomes", no deduction would be allowed to him under the said provision. In plain terms, this sub-section (5) of section 80A of the Act imposes an additional condition for claim

NAVAYUGA ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of the said Chapter - VI A under the heading "C.-Deduction in respect of certain incomes", no deduction would be allowed to him under the said provision. In plain terms, this sub-section (5) of section 80A of the Act imposes an additional condition for claim

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

In the result appeals filed by the Revenue\nITA

10A or Section 10AA or Section 10B or Section 10BA\nor under any provision of this Chapter under the Head “C-\nDeductions in respect of certain income”, no deduction shall\nbe allowed to them. Further, the provisions of Section 80AC\ndeal with deductions not to be allowed unless return of\nincome is furnished and as per the said provisions

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

10A or Section 10AA or Section 10B or Section 10ВА\nor under any provision of this Chapter under the Head “C-\nDeductions in respect of certain income”, no deduction shall\nbe allowed to them. Further, the provisions of Section 80AC\ndeal with deductions not to be allowed unless return of\nincome is furnished and as per the said provisions

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

10A or Section 10AA or Section 10B or Section 10ВА\nor under any provision of this Chapter under the Head “C-\nDeductions in respect of certain income”, no deduction shall\nbe allowed to them. Further, the provisions of Section 80AC\ndeal with deductions not to be allowed unless return of\nincome is furnished and as per the said provisions

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

10A or Section 10AA or Section 10B or Section 10BA\nor under any provision of this Chapter under the Head “C-\nDeductions in respect of certain income”, no deduction shall\nbe allowed to them. Further, the provisions of Section 80AC\ndeal with deductions not to be allowed unless return of\nincome is furnished and as per the said provisions

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

10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of the said Chapter - VI A under the heading "C.-Deduction in respect of certain incomes", no deduction would be allowed to him under the said provision. In plain terms, this sub-section (5) of section 80A of the Act imposes an additional condition for claim

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

10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of the said Chapter - VI A under the heading "C.-Deduction in respect of certain incomes", no deduction would be allowed to him under the said provision. In plain terms, this sub-section (5) of section 80A of the Act imposes an additional condition for claim

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

10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of the said Chapter - VI A under the heading "C.-Deduction in respect of certain incomes", no deduction would be allowed to him under the said provision. In plain terms, this sub-section (5) of section 80A of the Act imposes an additional condition for claim

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

10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of the said Chapter - VI A under the heading "C.-Deduction in respect of certain incomes", no deduction would be allowed to him under the said provision. In plain terms, this sub-section (5) of section 80A of the Act imposes an additional condition for claim

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

10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of this Chapter under the heading “C-Deductions in respect of certain incomes”, no deduction shall be allowed to him thereunder Section 80AC Deduction not to be allowed unless furnished-Where in computing the total income of an assessee of the previous year relevant

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

10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of this Chapter under the heading “C-Deductions in respect of certain incomes”, no deduction shall be allowed to him thereunder Section 80AC Deduction not to be allowed unless furnished-Where in computing the total income of an assessee of the previous year relevant

BA CONTINUUM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

10A of the Act which was allowed in the subsequent year i.e., AY 2006-07 by the Ld. AO, during the regular assessment proceedings under section 143(3) of the Act. 7. Erred in upholding the action of the Ld. AO invoking Section 92CA(1) by not acknowledging the fact that reason for reopening the assessment was other than

NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED,R.R.DIST. vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

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

10A of the Act. Statements of farmers prima face shows otherwise. In our considered view, the Tribunal cannot close its eyes and [as1]oblivious to the above said clinching evidences/ stand of the farmers, now collected by the revenue. If the Tribunal chooses to ignore the above said facts despite those documents produced before the Tribunal, the Tribunal would

NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED,R.R.DIST. vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

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

10A of the Act. Statements of farmers prima face shows otherwise. In our considered view, the Tribunal cannot close its eyes and [as1]oblivious to the above said clinching evidences/ stand of the farmers, now collected by the revenue. If the Tribunal chooses to ignore the above said facts despite those documents produced before the Tribunal, the Tribunal would

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1),, HYDERABAD vs. NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED, R.R. DIST, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

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

10A of the Act. Statements of farmers prima face shows otherwise. In our considered view, the Tribunal cannot close its eyes and [as1]oblivious to the above said clinching evidences/ stand of the farmers, now collected by the revenue. If the Tribunal chooses to ignore the above said facts despite those documents produced before the Tribunal, the Tribunal would

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1),, HYDERABAD vs. NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED, R.R. DIST, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

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

10A of the Act. Statements of farmers prima face shows otherwise. In our considered view, the Tribunal cannot close its eyes and [as1]oblivious to the above said clinching evidences/ stand of the farmers, now collected by the revenue. If the Tribunal chooses to ignore the above said facts despite those documents produced before the Tribunal, the Tribunal would

DR.REDDY'S LABORATORIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, we hold that the Tax Authorities were not justified in apportioning R & D expenditure and ESOP cost to the units which claimed exemption u/s 10B, 80IB and 80IC of the Act

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

10A to the return of income does not accept the negative profit of one 10B unit to aggregate with positive profit of the other unit. This plea of the assessee found acceptance of the Assessing Officer. In otherwords, the main basis on which the assessment was sought to be reopened, was found to be wrong. 10. As regards