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

In the result appeals filed by the Revenue\nITA

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, no\ndeduction\nunder\nSection\n80ΙΑ\nor\nother

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

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, no\ndeduction\nunder\nSection\n80ΙΑ\nother\ndeductions/exemption

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

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, no\ndeduction\nunder\nSection\n80ΙΑ\nor\nother

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

reassessment made in pursuance to section 153A of the Act is not a denovo assessment and therefore, it was not open to the assessee to claim and be allowed such deduction or allowance of expenditure which it had not claimed in the original assessment proceedings which in the case of the assessee stood completed prior to the date of search

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

reassessment made in pursuance to section 153A of the Act is not a denovo assessment and therefore, it was not open to the assessee to claim and be allowed such deduction or allowance of expenditure which it had not claimed in the original assessment proceedings which in the case of the assessee stood completed prior to the date of search

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD vs. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATI RAJ, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue and cross- objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

10B on or before the due date provided for filing the return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act, for claiming exemption under Section 11 of the Act. The assessee has also referred to the amendment to Section 12A of the Act, by the Finance Act, 2017 and the Finance Act, 2020, making it mandatory for filing return

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

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 of deduction in relation to income

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

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 of deduction in relation to income

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

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 of deduction in relation to income

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD vs. BHAGIRADHA CHEMICALS & INDUSTRIES LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

reassessment order of AO who had reopened the assessment undersection 148 of the Act on a mere change of opinion or audit objection and dehors of any tangible material, in respect of an assessment which was concluded by determining the income of the under section 143(3) of the Act 2) The Commissioner (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the assessment

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

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 of deduction in relation to income

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

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 of deduction in relation to income

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

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 of deduction in relation to income

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

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 of deduction in relation to income

JEL FIANANCE & INVESTMENTS LIMITED,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS JUBILIANT ENGINEERING LIMITED), HYD, HYD,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

10B of the Act, therefore it cannot be said that the Ld. AO had not verified the eligibility of the inclusion of foreign exchange gains on account of reinstatement of debtors and creditors. The Ld. AR also submitted that reinstatement of debtors and creditors is part of the undertaking being an 100% EOU unit. Therefore, issue of notice under section

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

10B had reported loss but the assessee had not made adjustments to exempt income in that year, whereas the fact remains that the loss of one unit had been set off against the profits of the other units, as per section 70, in line with the CBDT circular. In fact the Assessing Officer accepted the contention of the assessee

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

10B had reported loss but the assessee had not made adjustments to exempt income in that year, whereas the fact remains that the loss of one unit had been set off against the profits of the other units, as per section 70, in line with the CBDT circular. In fact the Assessing Officer accepted the contention of the assessee

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

10B had reported loss but the assessee had not made adjustments to exempt income in that year, whereas the fact remains that the loss of one unit had been set off against the profits of the other units, as per section 70, in line with the CBDT circular. In fact the Assessing Officer accepted the contention of the assessee