DR. REDDYS, LABORATORIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.490 & 491/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Dr. Reddy’S Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad. The Acit, Vs. Pin – 500 034. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – Telangana. 500 084. Pan Aaacd7999Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Padamchand Khincha राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

u/s 80-IC/801AB/10AA of the Act. 11.4. Further the Ld. A.O/Hon'ble DRP, ignored the order of Hon'ble ITAT in Appellant own case for the previous assessment years wherein the Hon'ble ITAT has ruled in favour of Appellant. The Appellant requests, to consider each of the above grounds of appeal without prejudice to each other and reserves

DR. REDDYS, LABORATORIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.490 & 491/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Dr. Reddy’S Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad. The Acit, Vs. Pin – 500 034. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – Telangana. 500 084. Pan Aaacd7999Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Padamchand Khincha राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

u/s 80-IC/801AB/10AA of the Act. 11.4. Further the Ld. A.O/Hon'ble DRP, ignored the order of Hon'ble ITAT in Appellant own case for the previous assessment years wherein the Hon'ble ITAT has ruled in favour of Appellant. The Appellant requests, to consider each of the above grounds of appeal without prejudice to each other and reserves

SYED GULAM MOHIUDDIN,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.136/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Syed Gulam Vs. Income Tax Officer Mohiuddin (International Taxation)-1 Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Decpm0365H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shiva Sewak, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 12.01.2023 Of The Learned Assessing Officer (International Taxation-1), Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Read As Under: “1. The Final Assessment Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Int Taxn)-1,Hyd (Herein After Referred To As 'Ao) Is Erroneous Both On Facts & In Law To The Extent The Order Is Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Appellant.

260 Taxman 273 (Bom.) iii) The department respectfully submits that, it is fact that, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Hon'ble DRP against the additions made by the AO. iv. The department prays to draw attention of the Hon'ble Bench to the provisions contained in Section 144C(13) of the I.T.Act .The usage of the phrase "notwithstanding

ITO, WARD-7(3), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. KOSETTY KISHORE, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

260 ITR 491 (Bom.) and K. Radhika Vs DCIT, ITAT, 6 I.T.A. No. 342/Hyd/15 and others Kosetty Koshore and others Hyderabad, 47 SOT 180. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in directing the Assessing Officer to examine the issue of taxability of capital gain in the assessment year 2009-10 when

ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. K GOPAL RAJ, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

260 ITR 491 (Bom.) and K. Radhika Vs DCIT, ITAT, 6 I.T.A. No. 342/Hyd/15 and others Kosetty Koshore and others Hyderabad, 47 SOT 180. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in directing the Assessing Officer to examine the issue of taxability of capital gain in the assessment year 2009-10 when

ITO, WARD-7(3), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. KOSETTY NAGARAJU, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

260 ITR 491 (Bom.) and K. Radhika Vs DCIT, ITAT, 6 I.T.A. No. 342/Hyd/15 and others Kosetty Koshore and others Hyderabad, 47 SOT 180. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in directing the Assessing Officer to examine the issue of taxability of capital gain in the assessment year 2009-10 when

K GOPAL RAJ, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CEN.CIRCLE-1(3), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

260 ITR 491 (Bom.) and K. Radhika Vs DCIT, ITAT, 6 I.T.A. No. 342/Hyd/15 and others Kosetty Koshore and others Hyderabad, 47 SOT 180. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in directing the Assessing Officer to examine the issue of taxability of capital gain in the assessment year 2009-10 when

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

147 or 263 proceedings are pending. The order u/s. 143(1) is placed at pages 211-222 of paper book volume-2. Referring to pages 223-227 of the paper book volume-2, he submitted that the AO in the order passed u/s. 143(3) for AY 2020-21 has allowed the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA. Referring

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

147 or 263 proceedings are pending. The order u/s. 143(1) is placed at pages 211-222 of paper book volume-2. Referring to pages 223-227 of the paper book volume-2, he submitted that the AO in the order passed u/s. 143(3) for AY 2020-21 has allowed the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA. Referring

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-17(2), HYDERABAD vs. VST INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Vst Industries Ltd., Income-Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 17(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaacv 6799C (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Yvst Sai Assessee By: Shri Ts Ajai Date Of Hearing: 17/03/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 22/04/2021

260/-. Scrutiny assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 30/11/2011 assessing the total taxable income of the assessee at Rs. 55,81,16,656/-. 2.1 Thereafter, the AO observed as under: “(a) The assessee has claimed foreign exchange fluctuation loss of Rs.15,61,37,788/-. This includes loss of Rs.4,54,05,100/- on account of debtors/creditors

RAIN CEMENTS LIMITED, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Rain Cements Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Rain Income Tax, Circle 3 (1) Cii Carbon (India) Ltd Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabcr8858F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Advocate Prathishta Singh & Advocate Deepak Chopra Revenue By: Dr.Rajendra Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 24.03.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(5) R.W.S. 260 Of The I.T. Act For The A.Y 2008-09. 2. This Appeal Was Earlier Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 18.10.2019. Subsequently Vide Ma No.15/Hyd/2020, Dated 23.3.2021, The Tribunal Recalled The Entire Order For Fresh Adjudication. Therefore, This Is A Recalled Matter.

260 of the I.T. Act for the A.Y 2008-09. 2. This appeal was earlier decided by the Tribunal vide order dated 18.10.2019. Subsequently vide MA No.15/Hyd/2020, dated 23.3.2021, the Tribunal recalled the entire order for fresh adjudication. Therefore, this is a recalled matter. Page 1 of 35 ITA No 864 of 2017 Rain Cements Ltd Hyderabad 3. Facts

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

u/s. Income Returned (Rs) Assessed Income (Rs.) 1 M/s. Swastik Vegetable Oil Products Pvt. Ltd. AADCS2224G 2012-13 143(3) r.w.s 153C of the 1.T. Act (8,54,540)/- 22,87,460/- 2 M/s. Swastik Vegetable Oil Products Pvt. Ltd. AADCS2224G 2013-14 143(3) r.w.s 153C

ASRA AHMED ,HYDERABAD vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.156/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

260/-. Subsequently, Ld.AO has received information from ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad vide letter dated 19.01.2022 that certain material pertains / relates to the assessee found during the course of search in the case of Skill Promoters Pvt Ltd. The documents seized refers to agreement of sale entered into by Sri Syed Ahmed Ziauddin and Smt. Asra Ahmed with respect

SYED AHMED ZEESHANUDDIN,HYDERABAD vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.156/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

260/-. Subsequently, Ld.AO has received information from ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad vide letter dated 19.01.2022 that certain material pertains / relates to the assessee found during the course of search in the case of Skill Promoters Pvt Ltd. The documents seized refers to agreement of sale entered into by Sri Syed Ahmed Ziauddin and Smt. Asra Ahmed with respect

NATURAL POWER ASIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-16(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

260/-; (iii). Interest receuved from HDFC Bank Ltd – Rs.14,700/-; and (iv) contract receipts from M/s. Waaree Energies Limited – Rs.23,14,970/-, had not filed its return of income, initiated proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. Order u/s 148A(d) of the 3 Natural Power Asia Pvt. Ltd. Act was passed by the A.O. Thereafter, the A.O. issued notice u/s

DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDRABAD vs. KALPTARU INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.1077/Hyd/2025

260/- on account of disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act. 2. In this case, information has been received under Project Falcon from DGIT(Investigation), Mumbai on 06.03.2020 through the Income-tax Business Application regarding coordinated and premediated trading on the Bombay Stock Exchange by engaging in reversal trades in illiquid stock options resulting in non- genuine business

SRI KSSV FINVEST PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(3), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2012-13 Sri Kssv Finvest Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 3(3), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaack9655Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

260 (Hyd. Trib.) 4. Spandana Sphoorty Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT, ITA No. 1653/Hyd/12, order dated 10/10/2014 5. Goetze India Ltd., [2014] 361 ITR 505 (Delhi) 10. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Assessee has pressed only additional grounds of appeal and accordingly, we proceed to adjudicate only additional grounds and the other grounds of appeal

CENTENARY BAPTIST CHURCH,WARANGAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) 1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are dismissed

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

section 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, “the Act”), respectively. ITA No.117 and 118/Hyd/2024 2. In these two appeals, the Registry has pointed out that the defect notices issued by the Registry to the assessee on 21.02.2024 were not rectified. The defects pointed out by the Registry are to the following effect

CENTENARY BAPTIST CHURCH,WARANGAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- EXEMPTIONS 1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are dismissed

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

section 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, “the Act”), respectively. ITA No.117 and 118/Hyd/2024 2. In these two appeals, the Registry has pointed out that the defect notices issued by the Registry to the assessee on 21.02.2024 were not rectified. The defects pointed out by the Registry are to the following effect