RAMKY INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. JCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Ramky Infrastructure Ltd, Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income Tax, Pan:Aaacr8627B Circle 3(1), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram. Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 15/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/11/2022 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M

53A of the Act. In this order, the AO has considered the claim of deduction under section 801A of the Act as he did in respect assessment years 2003-04 to 2008-09. The AO had called for complete details of the claim made and examined the same in the light of the provisions of the Act. The AO, like

SRUTHI RIEDL,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Sruthi Riedl, Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad Vs. (International [Pan No. Aggpp6953R] Taxation)-2, Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा /Assessee By: Shri H. Srinivasulu, Ar /Revenue By: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit-Dr राजस्‍वजस्‍व द्वारा सुनवाई ई की तारीखीख/Date Of Hearing: 28/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीखीख/Pronouncement On: 08/11/2023

53A of the T.P Act and accordingly no capital gain arises in A.Y 2016-17. 20.The hon'ble DRP failed to consider the facts correctly and upheld the action of Ld A.O. There was no capital gain, of Rs. 2,56,92,030 accrued to the assessee in real sense. 21.The Ld A.O/DRP erred in adopting the cost of project

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL vs. PANYAM CEMENT & MINERAL INDUSTRIS LIMITED , NANDYAL

In the result, both the appeals by the Revenue are partly allowed and the C

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

53A of Transfer of Property Act, Section 2(24) of IT Act applies and Transfer has taken place when limited/irrevocable power of attorney is given to developer and registration may be done subsequently. In this case, such GPA was entered into by the assessee in the AY 2006-07. Reliance is placed on the following judicial decisions: (a) Chaturbu] Dwarakadas

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL vs. PANYAM CEMENTS & MINERAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED, NANDYAL

In the result, both the appeals by the Revenue are partly allowed and the C

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

53A of Transfer of Property Act, Section 2(24) of IT Act applies and Transfer has taken place when limited/irrevocable power of attorney is given to developer and registration may be done subsequently. In this case, such GPA was entered into by the assessee in the AY 2006-07. Reliance is placed on the following judicial decisions: (a) Chaturbu] Dwarakadas

DEMI REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

reassessment or re-computation, as envisaged in Section 132B(1)(i) of the Act. The Appellant in this regard three orders passed by Hon’ble ITAT Benches viz., (i) ACIT Vs. Narendra N. Thacker [(2016) 45 ITR Trib 188 (Kol)]; (ii) unreported judgement in ACIT Vs. Sajjan Singh and (iii) unreported order in Arun Bansal, Delhi Vs. ACIT, Delhi