NETMATRIX CROP CARE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

80C for any assessment year beginning on or after the 1st day of April, 2006. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section,— (a) "cost", in relation to any long-term specified asset, means the amount invested in such specified asset out of capital gains received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the original asset; (b) "long

VENKATA SWAMY KATAKAM,JAYASHANKAR BHUPALPALLY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARANGAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 124/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Venkata Swamy Katakam, Income Tax Officer, Jangedu, Bhupalpally Vs. Ward-2, [Pan : Amupk5536B] Warangal अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

68,276/-. 3. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A), but according to the learned CIT(A), despite issue of notices, assessee failed to furnish any information to substantiate his case. Hence the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. 4. Aggrieved by the impugned order, assessee filed this appeal on as many as six grounds

F5 NETWORKS INNOVATION PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

68,190/- in its return, which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act by the CPC, resulting in a disallowance of ₹5,13,01,761/- towards gratuity expenses under section 43B of the Act. This adjustment increased the assessee’s income to ₹ 63,40,69,950/-. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny