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

section 72AB of the Act. In the present case, the amalgamating company i.e. Bobbili Co-operative bank not filed return of income as required u/s 72AB of the Act. Therefore, the claim of the assessee cannot be allowed. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has correctly decided the issue and disallowed the claim of the assessee.” 14. Insofar

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

section 72AB of the Act. In the present case, the amalgamating company i.e. Bobbili Co-operative bank not filed return of income as required u/s 72AB of the Act. Therefore, the claim of the assessee cannot be allowed. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has correctly decided the issue and disallowed the claim of the assessee.” 14. Insofar

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

section 72AB of the Act. In the present case, the amalgamating company i.e. Bobbili Co-operative bank not filed return of income as required u/s 72AB of the Act. Therefore, the claim of the assessee cannot be allowed. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has correctly decided the issue and disallowed the claim of the assessee.” 14. Insofar

THE ASST. CIT,, GUNTUR vs. M/S. BEST INDIA YOBACCO SUPPLIERS PVT.LTD,, GUNTUR

In the result appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.238/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12) Acit Vs. M/S Best India Tobacco Circle-1(1) Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. Guntur D.No.9-11-1, Kothapet Guntur [Pan :Aaacb9184B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Co.No.59/Viz/2017 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.238/Viz/2017) (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12) M/S Best India Tobacco Acit Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1(1) D.No.9-11-1, Kothapet Guntur Guntur [Pan :Aaacb9184B]

23,43,259/- deleted by the Ld.CIT(A) stating that the payments are covered by Section 172 of the I.T.Act. Section 172 deals with the application of TDS

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)

section 194A(3)(v) would prevail. 5.3 In view of the clarification given in the circular the view taken in the appellate order dtd.22.10.2013 suffers from mistake and, as such a view was taken without consideration of the above referred CBDT circular clarifying the position of law, it would amount to mistake apparent from record and rectifiable u/s.154

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)

section 194A(3)(v) would prevail. 5.3 In view of the clarification given in the circular the view taken in the appellate order dtd.22.10.2013 suffers from mistake and, as such a view was taken without consideration of the above referred CBDT circular clarifying the position of law, it would amount to mistake apparent from record and rectifiable u/s.154

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

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.68/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Kanakamahalakshmi Co- Income Tax Operative Bank Ltd., Circle-1(1) D.No.49-34-22, Main Road, Visakhapatnam Akkayyapalem, Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aacft 6489 J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Co No.59/Viz/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita No.68/Viz/2021) (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15) M/S. Kanakamahalakshmi Co- Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Operative Bank Ltd., Income Tax D.No.49-34-22, Main Road, Circle-1(1) Akkayyapalem, Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aacft 6489 J] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 28.02.2022 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.03.2022 O R D E R

TDs under section 194A. (emphasis underlined) Thus the circular clarifies that provisions of section 194A(3)(v) would prevail. 44. The Ld. CIT(A) by following his own decision for the assessment year 2007- 08 and also order of the Tribunal for the very same year in the rectification order he has deleted the addition made

EISWAR EAXPORTS,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-6,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blem/S. Eswar Exports, Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-6, D.No. 23-14-13, Chinnamvari Visakhapatnam. Street, Visakhapatnam. Tan No. Vpne00441A (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS was not deducted. In this context, ld. CIT(A) has observed in his order that default committed by the assessee was pointed out during the survey in January, 2013, but assessee did not choose to make payment immediately, some amounts have been paid only after passing of the order under section

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1) (TDS), VIJAYAWADA vs. M/S SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P. LTD., TIRUPATHI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.452-454/Viz/2010 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Ys : 2008-09 To 2010-11 Respectively) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Southern Power Circle-3(1) (Tds) Distribution Company Of Vijayawada A.P.Limited Behind Srinivasa Kalyana Mandapam Kesavavayana Gunta Tirupati [Pan : Hydso8188F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1217/H/2010,517/Viz/2019 &518/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Ys : 2008-09 To 2010-11 Respectively) M/S Southern Power Distribution Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Company Of A.P.Limited Income Tax Behind Srinivasa Kalyana Mandapam Circle-3(1) (Tds) Kesavavayana Gunta Vijayawada Tirupati [Pan : Hydso8188F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri C.P.Rama Swami, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.10.2019

section 194I are applicable in the instant case. Therefore, requested to uphold the order of the AO and set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(DR) also relied on the decision of CIT Vs. Kotak Securities Ltd. (2011) 203 Taxman 0086. On the other hand, the Ld.AR argued that the payments made to AP Transco

PAVANI DEVI,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT(A)-2,, GUNTUR

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blesmt. Pavani Devi, Vs. Acit, Cpc (Tds), M/S. N. Koteswara & Co., Cas, Ghaziabad. D.No. 23-6-17/2, Patnam Bazar, Guntur. Pan No. Afmpd 2253 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.V.N. Hari – Advocate. Department By : Mrs. Suman Malik – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/12/2018. Date Of Pronouncement : 01/01/2019. O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao

TDS deducted for the respective assessment year prior to 01/06/2015. Hence, the demand notices under section 200A by the respondent authority for intimation for payment of fee under section 234E can be said as without any authority of law and the same are quashed and set aside to that extent.” 10. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case

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:

23,82,970 4. Disallowance of pay leaves and sick leaves (Rs. 12,01,926 10,48,088 + Rs. 1,53,838) Aggrieved by the above additions, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) while considering the submissions made by the assessee‟s Representative relied on the decision of his predecessor

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR(AH) VETERINARY HOSPITAL,,JAGGAMPETA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, WARD-1,, RAJAHMUNDRY

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blethe Asst. Director (Ah) Vs. Ito (Tds), Ward-1, Veterinary Hospital, D.No. 7-63, Rajahmundry. Gokavaram Road, Jaggampeta, East Godavari District. Pan No. Vpnao 1812 G (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS deducted for the respective assessment year prior to 01/06/2015. Hence, the demand notices under section 200A by the respondent authority for intimation for payment of fee under section 234E can be said as without any authority of law and the same are quashed and set aside to that extent.” 11. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case

AVNC HIGH SCHOOL,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL PROCESSING CELL, TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

TDS deducted for the respective assessment year prior to 01/06/2015. Hence, the demand notices under section 200A by the respondent authority for intimation for payment of fee under section 234E can be said as without any authority of law and the same are quashed and set aside to that extent.” 10. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case

AVNC HIGH SCHOOL, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL PROCESSING CELL, TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

TDS deducted for the respective assessment year prior to 01/06/2015. Hence, the demand notices under section 200A by the respondent authority for intimation for payment of fee under section 234E can be said as without any authority of law and the same are quashed and set aside to that extent.” 10. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case

VIKAS EDUCATRIONAL SOCIETY,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ITO, WARD - 3(2),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.385/Viz/2014 & I.T.A.No.386/Viz/2014 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2009-10 & 2010-11) M/S Vikas Educational Society Vs. The Income Tax Officer D.No.8-1-97/1/8, Ninitaas High Ward-3(2) Pedawaltair Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaatv 3260F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Kjd Srinivas, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2019

section 194I of Income Tax Act and the assessee failed to remit the same to the Government account, the AO issued show cause notice to the assessee, as to why the expenditure claimed should not be disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia) of the 6 I.T.A. No.385/Viz/2014 and 386/Viz/2014, A.Y.2009-10 & 2010-11 M/s Vikas Educational Society, Visakhapatnam Act for non deduction

VIKAS EDUCATRIONAL SOCIETY,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ITO, WARD - 3(2),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.385/Viz/2014 & I.T.A.No.386/Viz/2014 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2009-10 & 2010-11) M/S Vikas Educational Society Vs. The Income Tax Officer D.No.8-1-97/1/8, Ninitaas High Ward-3(2) Pedawaltair Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaatv 3260F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Kjd Srinivas, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2019

section 194I of Income Tax Act and the assessee failed to remit the same to the Government account, the AO issued show cause notice to the assessee, as to why the expenditure claimed should not be disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia) of the 6 I.T.A. No.385/Viz/2014 and 386/Viz/2014, A.Y.2009-10 & 2010-11 M/s Vikas Educational Society, Visakhapatnam Act for non deduction

MANORAMA ENTERPRISES,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, WARD-1, , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.385/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2013-14) M/S Manorama Enterprises Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.31-32-41 Tds, Ward-1 Near Leelamahal Theatre Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aadfm5585H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R.L.N.Somayajulu, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.V.Subba Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.07.2019 आदेश /O R D E R

TDS deducted for the respective assessment year prior to 01/06/2015. Hence, the demand notices under section 200A by the respondent authority for intimation for payment of fee under section 234E can be said as without any authority of law and the same are quashed and set aside to that extent.” 10. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case

GRANDHI SRI VENKATA AMARENDRA,ELURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result appeals of the assessee for the assessment year 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.23 & 24/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15) Sri Grandhi Sri Venkata Amarendra Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of C/O Vaibhav Jewllers Income Tax, Main Road Central Circle-1 Eluru Visakhapatnam [Pan : Abipa7175R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.50/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Grandhi Sri Venkata Income Tax, Amarendra Central Circle-1 C/O Vaibhav Jewellers Visakhapatnam Main Road Eluru [Pan : Abipa7175R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) निर्धाऩिती की ओि से/ Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar िधजस्व की ओि से/ Revenue By : Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, Dr सुिवधई की तधिीख / Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2018 घोषणध की तधिीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21 .08.2018

section 2(23) of Indian Stamp Act, 1999, but no such acknowledgement was obtained by the assessee. Most of the vouchers were not verified by the responsible person such as accountant, manager etc. and the addresses of the goldsmiths were not furnished. The AO was of the view that the assessee was unable to prove the expenditure with the credible