THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-2,, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VISAKHAPATNAM INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLY COMPANY. LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, I.T.A. No. 359/VIZ/2019 filed by the Revenue

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon'Ble

section 194(3)(iii)(b) of the Act. 3. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in granting relief holding that M/s. APIIC is an exempted entity u/sec. 194A(3)(iii)(f) of the Act ignoring the fact that as per the said provisions, in order to C.O.No. 126/VIZ/2019 (M/s. Visakhapatnam Industrial Water Supply Co. Ltd.) avail the exemption from TDS

INDIRA VOONA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 244/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Indira Voona V. Income Tax Officer – Ward 3(1) Visakhapatnam Plot No. 24, Sector 12 Mvp Colony, Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aewpv1518E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 268/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Income Tax Officer – Tds Ward -1 Indira Voona V. Visakhapatnam Plot No. 24, Sector 12 Mvp Colony, Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aewpv1518E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

3) The provisions of section 203A shall not apply to a person required to deduct tax in accordance with the provisions of this section. Explanation.–– For the purposes of this section,–– (a) “agricultural land” means agricultural land in India, not being a land situate in any area referred to in items (a) and (b) of sub-clause (iii) of clause

INDIRA VOONA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD 1, , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 244/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Indira Voona V. Income Tax Officer – Ward 3(1) Visakhapatnam Plot No. 24, Sector 12 Mvp Colony, Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aewpv1518E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 268/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Income Tax Officer – Tds Ward -1 Indira Voona V. Visakhapatnam Plot No. 24, Sector 12 Mvp Colony, Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aewpv1518E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

3) The provisions of section 203A shall not apply to a person required to deduct tax in accordance with the provisions of this section. Explanation.–– For the purposes of this section,–– (a) “agricultural land” means agricultural land in India, not being a land situate in any area referred to in items (a) and (b) of sub-clause (iii) of clause

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VIZAG SEAPORT PVT. LTD., VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon‟Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon‟Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 383/Viz/2017 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2012-13) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vizag Seaport Pvt Ltd., Income Tax, Administrative Block, Circle-5(1), S4 Gallery, Port Area, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam – 530035. (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) [Pan :Aabcv2484K] अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri Fenil A Bhatt, Ar प्रत्याथी की ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुनिाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15/02/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of : /04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Pers. Balakrishnan:

iii) of the Act to the extent of interest relating to capital asset till the same is put to use. 4. Any other ground that may be raised at the time of hearing.” 3. In addition, the assessee filed an application under Rule 27 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 and filed additional evidence in the form

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue, viz

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.

TDS) under Section 194-I of the Act, yet the income so received was assessable in the hands of the assessee firm as its “Income from business” and not as “Income from house property”. Also, a similar view had been taken by a coordinate bench of ITAT, Kolkata in the case of DCIT Vs Tewari Warehousing Co. (2018) 92 taxmann.com

DCIT, CIRCLE -3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue, viz

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.

TDS) under Section 194-I of the Act, yet the income so received was assessable in the hands of the assessee firm as its “Income from business” and not as “Income from house property”. Also, a similar view had been taken by a coordinate bench of ITAT, Kolkata in the case of DCIT Vs Tewari Warehousing Co. (2018) 92 taxmann.com

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

iii). infra school business\nundertaking. We find that, as per the scheme of arrangement (as had\nbeen referred by the AO), the assessee company had transferred the\nbusiness of “hospitality business undertaking” and “infrastructure\nbusiness undertaking” to M/s People Combine Hospitality Pvt. Ltd and\nM/s People Combine Amenities Pvt. Ltd., respectively. However, the\nstated corporate restructuring had no bearing