THE VISAKHAPATNAM CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

carry forward any losses or unabsorbed depreciation. The same cannot be allowed in the hands of the assessee‟s case. The Ld. CIT(A) correctly by considering the provisions of the Act disallowed the claim made by the assessee. So far as RBI guidelines with regard to the amortization of losses is concerned, in view of the specific provision provided

THE YANAM CO OPERATIVE STORES LIMITED,YANAM vs. PRINICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.360/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) The Yanam Cooperative Stores Limited V. Pr.Cit 3-2-058, Vishnalayam Street Aayakar Bhavan Dabagarden – 530020 Yanam – 533464 Visakhapatnam Puducherry Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aadft3518R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

TDS available in Form – 26AS. He therefore pleaded that the order of the Ld.Pr.CIT be quashed. However, Ld.AR conceded that the carried forward loss

THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1,, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ANDHRA PRADESH PAPER MILLS LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

loss and allow the same to be carried forward for the subsequent years. This ground of CO of the assessee stands allowed. 36. Ground No.4 is related to the granting of short credit of tax deducted at source while determining the balance income tax payable or refundable to the assessee. It is the obligation of the Assessing Officer

THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1,, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ANDHRA PRADESH PAPER MILLS LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

loss and allow the same to be carried forward for the subsequent years. This ground of CO of the assessee stands allowed. 36. Ground No.4 is related to the granting of short credit of tax deducted at source while determining the balance income tax payable or refundable to the assessee. It is the obligation of the Assessing Officer

THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1,, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ANDHRA PRADESH PAPER MILLS LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

loss and allow the same to be carried forward for the subsequent years. This ground of CO of the assessee stands allowed. 36. Ground No.4 is related to the granting of short credit of tax deducted at source while determining the balance income tax payable or refundable to the assessee. It is the obligation of the Assessing Officer

SRINIVASA FERRO ALLOYS LIMITED,SAMALKOTA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

TDS), Circle- 4, Durgapur. 4. The Ld. AR also argued that the amount of Rs.2,22,54,745/- was shown as other income while filing the return of income by SGAPPL. Further, the Ld. AR invited our attention to page 120 of the paper book showing computation of SGAPPL. 6. Per contra, the Ld. DR strongly argued that the interest

PADMASREE STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED,RAVULAPALEM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, KAKINADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.292/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year:2018-19) Vs. Dcit – Circle –1 Padmasree Steels Private Limited Rs No. 109 & 110 Devarapalli 3Rd Floor, Deepthi Towers Main Road Ravulapalem – 533238 Kakinada – 533001 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aadcp2642P]

carry forward loss. The Ld. AO also disallowed the provision for gratuity for the purpose of computation of book profits under section 115JB of the Act. Ld. AO also noticed that assessee has earned interest income of Rs.13,37,872/- as per Form 26AS but however disclosed an amount of Rs.12,89,998/- while filing return of Page

RANAR AGROCHEM LIMITED,PARAWADA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.288/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15) Ranar Agrochem Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaccp0372M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M. Madhusudan, Ca (Hybrid) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Jenardhanan V, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 14/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 31/10/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Company Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 15/05/2024, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “A.O.”) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”) Dated 30/12/2016 For A.Y.

forward losses of Rs. 69,43,433/- . Subsequently, the case of the assessee company was selected for scrutiny assessment under section 143(2) of the Act. 3. The AO vide his order passed under section 143(3) of the Act, dated 30/12/2016, made certain additions/disallowances to the returned income of the assessee company, viz. (i) disallowance under section

THE ASST. CIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE VISAKHAPATNAM CO -OPERATIVE BANK LIMITD,, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blem/S. The Visakhapatnam Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Visakhapatnam. Near Town Kotha Road, Main Road, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaaat 0844 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S. The Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam. Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Near Town Kotha Road, Main Road, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaaat 0844 L (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 58/Viz/2017 (Ita No. 308/Viz/2017) (Asst. Year : 2013-14) M/S. The Visakhapatnam Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Visakhapatnam. Near Town Kotha Road, Main Road, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaaat 0844 L (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS on the interest payment made to its members even if it exceeds Rs.10,000/-. The impugned disallowance made in the assessment is not in accordance with the clarification given in the CBDT Circular No.9/2002 and accordingly the AO is directed to delete the impugned disallowance made of C.O.No. 58/VIZ/2017 (The Visakhapatnam Co-op Bank Ltd.) Rs.5

THE VISAKHAPATNAM CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blem/S. The Visakhapatnam Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Visakhapatnam. Near Town Kotha Road, Main Road, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaaat 0844 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S. The Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam. Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Near Town Kotha Road, Main Road, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaaat 0844 L (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 58/Viz/2017 (Ita No. 308/Viz/2017) (Asst. Year : 2013-14) M/S. The Visakhapatnam Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Visakhapatnam. Near Town Kotha Road, Main Road, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaaat 0844 L (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS on the interest payment made to its members even if it exceeds Rs.10,000/-. The impugned disallowance made in the assessment is not in accordance with the clarification given in the CBDT Circular No.9/2002 and accordingly the AO is directed to delete the impugned disallowance made of C.O.No. 58/VIZ/2017 (The Visakhapatnam Co-op Bank Ltd.) Rs.5

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), GUNTUR vs. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.217/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Andhra Pradesh State Income Tax Housing Corporation Ltd., Circle-1(1) Plot No.11 & 12, Nirman Guntur Bhavan, Near Apiic Colony Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aabca7206L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

losses amounting to Rs.39,28,82,453/-. Subsequently, it was noticed that the annual accounts of the assessee for the financial year 2007-08, relevant to the A.Y.2008-09, furnished along with the return of income were “Provisional” and further noticed that the assessee had debited expenditure amounting to Rs.13,41,40,709/- in the Income & Expenditure A/c under different heads

BTHINA KUMARA SWAMY REDDY,NELLORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.287, 288 & 289/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Bathina Kumara Swamy Reddy V. Dcit – Central Circle -1 C.R. Building, Kannavari Thota Plot No. 7, Santhi Nagar Guntur – 522001, Andhra Pradesh Nellore - 524003 [Pan: Abxpb1094K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

TDS. 4. On the facts and circumstance of the case, Learned CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.18,52,026/- towards disallowance of expenditure as per provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 5. On the facts and circumstance of the case, the Learned CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the disallowance

BATHINA KUMARA SWAMY REDDY,NELLORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.287, 288 & 289/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Bathina Kumara Swamy Reddy V. Dcit – Central Circle -1 C.R. Building, Kannavari Thota Plot No. 7, Santhi Nagar Guntur – 522001, Andhra Pradesh Nellore - 524003 [Pan: Abxpb1094K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

TDS. 4. On the facts and circumstance of the case, Learned CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.18,52,026/- towards disallowance of expenditure as per provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 5. On the facts and circumstance of the case, the Learned CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the disallowance

BATHINA KUMARA SWAMY REDDY,NELLORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.287, 288 & 289/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Bathina Kumara Swamy Reddy V. Dcit – Central Circle -1 C.R. Building, Kannavari Thota Plot No. 7, Santhi Nagar Guntur – 522001, Andhra Pradesh Nellore - 524003 [Pan: Abxpb1094K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

TDS. 4. On the facts and circumstance of the case, Learned CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.18,52,026/- towards disallowance of expenditure as per provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 5. On the facts and circumstance of the case, the Learned CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the disallowance

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. HINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.202, 198, 199, 188, 200/Viz/2022 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2009-10, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Hindustan Shipyard Tax, Circle-3(1), Limited, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aach 4275 P (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

loss of Rs. 32,50,35,169/- and claiming a refund of Rs. 3,43,42,010/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and accordingly statutory notices U/s. 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee calling for information. The assessee’s Authorized Representative appeared from time to time and furnished

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. HINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.202, 198, 199, 188, 200/Viz/2022 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2009-10, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Hindustan Shipyard Tax, Circle-3(1), Limited, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aach 4275 P (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

loss of Rs. 32,50,35,169/- and claiming a refund of Rs. 3,43,42,010/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and accordingly statutory notices U/s. 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee calling for information. The assessee’s Authorized Representative appeared from time to time and furnished

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. HINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.202, 198, 199, 188, 200/Viz/2022 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2009-10, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Hindustan Shipyard Tax, Circle-3(1), Limited, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aach 4275 P (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

loss of Rs. 32,50,35,169/- and claiming a refund of Rs. 3,43,42,010/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and accordingly statutory notices U/s. 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee calling for information. The assessee’s Authorized Representative appeared from time to time and furnished

HINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-3, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.202, 198, 199, 188, 200/Viz/2022 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2009-10, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Hindustan Shipyard Tax, Circle-3(1), Limited, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aach 4275 P (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

loss of Rs. 32,50,35,169/- and claiming a refund of Rs. 3,43,42,010/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and accordingly statutory notices U/s. 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee calling for information. The assessee’s Authorized Representative appeared from time to time and furnished