GRR HOLDINGS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.164, 194 & 195/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15,2015-16 & 2017-18) Grr Holdings Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 3(3) Pan:Aaqfg0867M Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: N O N E सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/07/2024 आदेश/Order

Section 68 and various authorities on the point it was held that in this regard the following points are required to be noted:- Page 35

GRR HOLDINGS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.164, 194 & 195/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15,2015-16 & 2017-18) Grr Holdings Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 3(3) Pan:Aaqfg0867M Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: N O N E सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/07/2024 आदेश/Order

Section 68 and various authorities on the point it was held that in this regard the following points are required to be noted:- Page 35

SREE NAGENDRA CONSTRUCTIONS,,KHAMMAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

68 and as such\nno fault could be found with the order of the Tribunal which\nhad endorsed the decision of Commissioner (Appeals). In\nMahabir Prasad Prem Chand Jain v. ITO (1988) 40 Taxman 35\n(Del- Trib )(Tax Mag), it was held that amounts found in the\nbooks of assessee were in existence much prior to the\nbeginning

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

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / "नधा"रण अपीलाथ" / "" यथ" /

68,555/- on account of disallowance of expenditure of capital nature claimed under the head maintenance expenditure, Rs. 26,81,34,709/- on account of claim of ESOPs, Rs. 13,52,09,061/- on account of deduction under section 10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”). Page 2 of 33 ITA Nos.1231

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

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / "नधा"रण अपीलाथ" / "" यथ" /

68,555/- on account of disallowance of expenditure of capital nature claimed under the head maintenance expenditure, Rs. 26,81,34,709/- on account of claim of ESOPs, Rs. 13,52,09,061/- on account of deduction under section 10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”). Page 2 of 33 ITA Nos.1231

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

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / "नधा"रण अपीलाथ" / "" यथ" /

68,555/- on account of disallowance of expenditure of capital nature claimed under the head maintenance expenditure, Rs. 26,81,34,709/- on account of claim of ESOPs, Rs. 13,52,09,061/- on account of deduction under section 10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”). Page 2 of 33 ITA Nos.1231

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

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / "नधा"रण अपीलाथ" / "" यथ" /

68,555/- on account of disallowance of expenditure of capital nature claimed under the head maintenance expenditure, Rs. 26,81,34,709/- on account of claim of ESOPs, Rs. 13,52,09,061/- on account of deduction under section 10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”). Page 2 of 33 ITA Nos.1231

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

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / "नधा"रण अपीलाथ" / "" यथ" /

68,555/- on account of disallowance of expenditure of capital nature claimed under the head maintenance expenditure, Rs. 26,81,34,709/- on account of claim of ESOPs, Rs. 13,52,09,061/- on account of deduction under section 10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”). Page 2 of 33 ITA Nos.1231

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

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / "नधा"रण अपीलाथ" / "" यथ" /

68,555/- on account of disallowance of expenditure of capital nature claimed under the head maintenance expenditure, Rs. 26,81,34,709/- on account of claim of ESOPs, Rs. 13,52,09,061/- on account of deduction under section 10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”). Page 2 of 33 ITA Nos.1231

MUSADDILAL GEMS JEWELS PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, we uphold the addition of Rs

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

35,000 and confirming the addition of Rs.20,74,01,000 although the entire cash deposits are of the same genre of business. 5. The ld.CIT(A) erred in law in confirming the AOs findings that the provisions of section 68

VAISHNAVI BULLION PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, we uphold the addition of Rs

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

35,000 and confirming the addition of Rs.20,74,01,000 although the entire cash deposits are of the same genre of business. 5. The ld.CIT(A) erred in law in confirming the AOs findings that the provisions of section 68

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(1), HYDERABAD vs. M/S. MUSADDILAL GEMS AND JEWELS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, we uphold the addition of Rs

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

35,000 and confirming the addition of Rs.20,74,01,000 although the entire cash deposits are of the same genre of business. 5. The ld.CIT(A) erred in law in confirming the AOs findings that the provisions of section 68

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(1), HYDERABAD vs. VAISHNAVI BULLION PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, we uphold the addition of Rs

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

35,000 and confirming the addition of Rs.20,74,01,000 although the entire cash deposits are of the same genre of business. 5. The ld.CIT(A) erred in law in confirming the AOs findings that the provisions of section 68

SANGEETA YADAV,K V RANGA REDDY vs. ITO., WARD-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) but could not succeed.

Section 69A of the Act, addition of Rs.26,35,565/- u/s 68 of the 3 Sangeeta Yadav Income Tax Act as unexplained

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. ADHITHI INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

68 of the Act from\nRs.4,35,18,530/- to Rs.6,20,000/-. It was argued that such a\ndrastic reduction was unwarranted, unjustified, and contrary to\nlaw. The Ld. DR submitted that the Ld. AO had made the addition\nof Rs.4,35,18,530/- as unexplained cash credits under section

SHYAMPRASAD REDDY GADDAM,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 196/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shyamprasad Reddy Vs. Dcit, Gaddam, Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aetpg9117P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/10/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)- 11, Hyderabad, Dated 02/02/2004, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 144 R.W.S 153A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”), Dated 12/12/2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2 Shyamprasad Reddy Gaddam Vs. Dcit

Section 144 r.w.s 153A of the Act, dated 12/12/2019, determined the income of the assessee at Rs. 36,14,47,165/-, i.e., after making three additions viz., (i) unexplained investment U/s. 69 of the Act (as admitted in the course of the search proceedings): Rs. 35,16,93,754/-; (ii) unexplained investment towards stamp duty and other charges

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

35,05,411/-; and (iv) addition under section 68 in respect of alleged bogus transactions with M/s. Lakshin Infradev

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. BRAMHANI INDUSTRIES LIMITED, JAMMALAMADUGU, YSR DIST., YSR DIST.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Sri Chandra Mohan Garga.Y. 2010-11 Bramhani Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Jammalamadugu. Circle-1(3), Pan: Aadcb 1666 M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Bramhani Industries Circle-1(2), Limited, Hyderabad. Jammalamadugu. Pan: Aadcb 1666 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri Gowtham Jain Revenue By Sri K.V. Aravind, Sr. Standing Counsel For Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/01/2022 Order

Section 68 of the Act is completely unwarranted in the given facts of the present case, and hence the same is directed to be deleted. Accordingly, concise Ground No.1 of the assessee’s appeal mentioned herein above is held in favour of the assessee. 32. Ground No.2: Addition of Rs. 15,99,60,041/- on the notional gain arising