ADP PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD, TELANGANA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD, TELANGANA

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

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

section 155(20) of the Act and therefore it amounts to impossibility of performance. 3.5 The Assessment Order passed by the Ld. AO is erroneous and bad in law as much as the Ld. AO has passed the order without considering the submissions and prevailing judicial precedents made during the course of hearing. Grounds relating to Transfer Pricing

ADP PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ground of appeal No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhassessment Year:2014-15

155. “10.1 The Transfer Pricing Officer included this company in the list of comparables. On being called upon to explain as to why it should not be considered as a comparable, the assessee contended that there was functional dissimilarity inasmuch as this company was engaged in software development and IT enabled services and also Products. The Transfer Pricing Officer observed

DCIT,CENT CIR-2(4), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. CLEAN CITY ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Alankamonyassessment Year: 2011-12 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Clean City Estates Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle – 2(4), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaccc4799H Appellant Respondent Revenue By: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram Date Of Hearing: 11/12/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/02/2020 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M.:

155/- for the year under consideration. 5. the appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above ground be set aside and that of the AO be restored and 6. The appellant prays that the other ground (s) that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 4. The ld. DR supported the order of AO while

THERMODYNE DYNAMICS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -17(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us :

prices less than FMV to a firm or company. The intent of legislation is to tackle transfer of shares and not the cases of primary allotment of the share. c) The assessee entered into an understanding with Kineta Global Limited and their promoters on 18-02-2010 for investing Rs. 50 crores for acquiring not less than 51% of Kineta

SUNIL KUMAR AHUJA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Sunil Kumar Ahuja, Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Pan:Ablpa2822L Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S.Rama Rao, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 13/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/04/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.02.2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2007-08. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Derives Income From Investment In Real Estate & Share Marketing. He Had Filed His Return Of Income On 2.11.2007 Declaring An Income Of Rs.34,60,554/- & Agricultural Income Of Rs.1,08,410/-. A Search & Seizure Operation U/S 132 Of The Act Was Conducted At The Residential & Business Premises Of The Assessee On 17.09.2008. Notice U/S 153A Of The Act Issued On 28.07.2009 Was Served On The Assessee On 17.08.2009. In Page 1 Of 22

Section 53A of Transfer of Property Act and as the holding is less than 3 years the computation made by the Assessing Officer of a Short-Term Capital Gain of Rs.1,12,06,602/- is hereby confirmed and the ground no.3 is dismissed accordingly”. 13. Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT (A) the assessee is in appeal before

DCIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MATRIX LABORATORIES LIMITED), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

Transfer Pricing Order. The AO vide his draft order determined the total income at Rs. 4,10,61,80,902/- under normal computation and at Rs. 6,17,63,60,040/- u/s. 115JB of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order, assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), assessee contested various additions and the Ld.CIT

MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MATRIX LABORATORIES LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

Transfer Pricing Order. The AO vide his draft order determined the total income at Rs. 4,10,61,80,902/- under normal computation and at Rs. 6,17,63,60,040/- u/s. 115JB of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order, assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), assessee contested various additions and the Ld.CIT

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

price', is ab-initio void as per the provisions of Sec.23of the Contracts Act, 1872 and thus non-est in the eyes of law. Hence, such SBNs cannot be treated as having arisen out of a contract for sale. The above discussion takes care of the additional submissions made by the assessee on 24.12.2019 that entire credits in the books

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

price', is ab-initio void as per the provisions of Sec.23of the Contracts Act, 1872 and thus non-est in the eyes of law. Hence, such SBNs cannot be treated as having arisen out of a contract for sale. The above discussion takes care of the additional submissions made by the assessee on 24.12.2019 that entire credits in the books

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

price', is ab-initio void as per the provisions of Sec.23of the Contracts Act, 1872 and thus non-est in the eyes of law. Hence, such SBNs cannot be treated as having arisen out of a contract for sale. The above discussion takes care of the additional submissions made by the assessee on 24.12.2019 that entire credits in the books

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

price', is ab-initio void as per the provisions of Sec.23of the Contracts Act, 1872 and thus non-est in the eyes of law. Hence, such SBNs cannot be treated as having arisen out of a contract for sale. The above discussion takes care of the additional submissions made by the assessee on 24.12.2019 that entire credits in the books

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. PRAKASH NIMMAGADDA, HYDERABAD, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.974/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy.Cit Vs. Shri Prakash Nimmagadda Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acbpn4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/12/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order, Dated 20/03/2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-9, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:

155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of this sub-clause as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections: (c)any property, other than immovable property,— (A)without consideration, the aggregate fair market value of which exceeds fifty thousand rupees, the whole

K VIJAYA BHASKAR REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of sub-clause (b) as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections. Provided further that this clause shall not apply to any sum of money or any property received- (a) from any relative

K LAXMA REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of sub-clause (b) as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections. Provided further that this clause shall not apply to any sum of money or any property received- (a) from any relative

N JAIVEER REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of sub-clause (b) as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections. Provided further that this clause shall not apply to any sum of money or any property received- (a) from any relative

N JAIDEEP REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of sub-clause (b) as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections. Provided further that this clause shall not apply to any sum of money or any property received- (a) from any relative

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCL GREEN HABITATS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of sub-clause (b) as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections : Provided further that this clause shall not apply to any sum of money or any property received— (a) from any relative

DEVGEN SEEDS AND CROP TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED, SECUNDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-17(1) HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

Transfer Pricing Study Report which was filed with the TPO by letter dated 25.05.2015 (see pages 211, 212, 225 and 240 to 244 of the Factual Paperbook). A perusal of pages 240 to 244 shows that the Appellant had benchmarked the :- 5 -: ITA Nos.187/Hyd/2017 & 2225/Hyd/2017 interest on FCD by comparing the same with debentures issued by Indian companies, details whereof

DEVGEM SEEDS AND CROP TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

Transfer Pricing Study Report which was filed with the TPO by letter dated 25.05.2015 (see pages 211, 212, 225 and 240 to 244 of the Factual Paperbook). A perusal of pages 240 to 244 shows that the Appellant had benchmarked the :- 5 -: ITA Nos.187/Hyd/2017 & 2225/Hyd/2017 interest on FCD by comparing the same with debentures issued by Indian companies, details whereof