SRI SEETARAMANJANENYA SORTEX,KAKINADA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.147/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sri Seetaramanjaneya Sortex Vs. Principal Commissioner Of 1-2015/A, Uppalanka Income Tax Kakinada Visakhapatnam [Pan : Abdfs4641P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

section u/s 2(24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) and applicability of TDS provision on expenditures towards interest, commission, contract

INCOMETAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SURENDRA NATH GUBBALA, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Us:

x) Rohtak Textile Mills Ltd (1982) 138 ITR 195 (Del). xi) B.N. Pinto Vs. CIT (1974) 96 ITR 306 (Kar). xii) CIT Vs. C.V. Soundararajan (1984) 150 ITR 80 (Mad). xiii) CIT Vs. Abrar Ali (2001) 247 ITR 312 (Bom). xiv) Mala Kumar Vs. Asst. CIT (2020) Tax Pub (DT) 2107 (Delhi-Trib.) xv) CIT Vs. Eagle Theaters

DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAJAHMAHENDRAVARAM vs. ANDHRA PAPER LIMITED, RAJAHMAHENDRAVARAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 162/Viz/2022 & 189/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Andhra Paper Limited Tax, Circle-1, (M/S. International Paper Rajamahendravaram. Appm Ltd), Sri Ram Nagar, Rajamahendravaram. Pan: Aact 8849 D (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) Co Nos: 22 & 23/Viz/2022 (In आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 162/Viz/2022 & 189/Viz/2022) ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Andhra Paper Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of (M/S. International Paper Appm Income Tax, Circle-1, Ltd), Rajamahendravaram. Sri Ram Nagar, Rajamahendravaram. Pan: Aact 8849 D (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri K. Chakrapani ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

TDS”. Notice U/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued and served on the assessee. Notice U/s. 142(1) of the Act dated 7/4/2014 and 11/4/2014 were issued respectively calling for the information. In response, Sri K. Chakrapani, General Manager (Taxation) and Sri Aditya, Senior Officer were authorized by the assessee-company and they furnished the required information called

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM vs. ANDHRA PAPER LIMITED, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 162/Viz/2022 & 189/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Andhra Paper Limited Tax, Circle-1, (M/S. International Paper Rajamahendravaram. Appm Ltd), Sri Ram Nagar, Rajamahendravaram. Pan: Aact 8849 D (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) Co Nos: 22 & 23/Viz/2022 (In आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 162/Viz/2022 & 189/Viz/2022) ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Andhra Paper Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of (M/S. International Paper Appm Income Tax, Circle-1, Ltd), Rajamahendravaram. Sri Ram Nagar, Rajamahendravaram. Pan: Aact 8849 D (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri K. Chakrapani ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

TDS”. Notice U/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued and served on the assessee. Notice U/s. 142(1) of the Act dated 7/4/2014 and 11/4/2014 were issued respectively calling for the information. In response, Sri K. Chakrapani, General Manager (Taxation) and Sri Aditya, Senior Officer were authorized by the assessee-company and they furnished the required information called

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

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