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 194A(3)(i)(d) of I.T.Act. In support of the same, the assessee has not furnished any documentary evidence to verify the transactions, hence, the Ld.PCIT set aside the matter to the file of the AO and directed the AO to call for the details of loan taken by the assessee and applicability of TDS provisions of the expenditure

MARIAPPAN AUSTIN PRAKASH,BENGALURU, KANRNATAKA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTL TXN CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM

section 143(2) and\n142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. After verification of\nthe submissions made by the assessee, the Ld. AO observed that as per Form\n26AS assessee has claimed a TDS amount of Rs.86,26

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SRI NARASIMHARAJU KANUMURI, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.267/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Narasimharaju Income Tax, Kanumuri, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aerpk2717F (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS u/s.195 for the payment made to non-residents of Rs.56,26,500/- as the non- residents have declared the said income in their returns of income, without appreciating the fact that the payments first proviso to Section

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA vs. TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.335, 339, 340, 341, 342 & 343/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Dcit – Circle – 1(1) Vs. Transmission Corporation Of Cr Buildings, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Limited Vijayawada – 520002 48-12-4/1, Gunadala Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada – 520004 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabct0088P] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) सी.ओ सं. / C.O. Nos. 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 & 35/Viz/2025 [आयकर अपीलसं.से उत्पन्न/I.T.A.Nos.335, 339, 340, 341, 342 & 343/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23)] Transmission Corporation Of Vs. Dcit – Circle – 1(1) Andhra Pradesh Limited Cr Buildings, M.G. Road 48-12-4/1, Gunadala Vijayawada – 520002 Vijayawada – 520004 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabct0088P] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri M. Chandramouleswara Rao, Ca करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

TDS deduction under section 194A on the said interest receipts without admitting the corresponding amounts received by the assessee, which is in contrary to the provisions of section 198 and 199(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI erred in holding that the interest accrued to the assessee are not taxable

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA vs. TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.335, 339, 340, 341, 342 & 343/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Dcit – Circle – 1(1) Vs. Transmission Corporation Of Cr Buildings, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Limited Vijayawada – 520002 48-12-4/1, Gunadala Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada – 520004 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabct0088P] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) सी.ओ सं. / C.O. Nos. 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 & 35/Viz/2025 [आयकर अपीलसं.से उत्पन्न/I.T.A.Nos.335, 339, 340, 341, 342 & 343/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23)] Transmission Corporation Of Vs. Dcit – Circle – 1(1) Andhra Pradesh Limited Cr Buildings, M.G. Road 48-12-4/1, Gunadala Vijayawada – 520002 Vijayawada – 520004 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabct0088P] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri M. Chandramouleswara Rao, Ca करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

TDS deduction under section 194A on the said interest receipts without admitting the corresponding amounts received by the assessee, which is in contrary to the provisions of section 198 and 199(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI erred in holding that the interest accrued to the assessee are not taxable

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA vs. TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.335, 339, 340, 341, 342 & 343/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Dcit – Circle – 1(1) Vs. Transmission Corporation Of Cr Buildings, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Limited Vijayawada – 520002 48-12-4/1, Gunadala Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada – 520004 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabct0088P] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) सी.ओ सं. / C.O. Nos. 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 & 35/Viz/2025 [आयकर अपीलसं.से उत्पन्न/I.T.A.Nos.335, 339, 340, 341, 342 & 343/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23)] Transmission Corporation Of Vs. Dcit – Circle – 1(1) Andhra Pradesh Limited Cr Buildings, M.G. Road 48-12-4/1, Gunadala Vijayawada – 520002 Vijayawada – 520004 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabct0088P] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri M. Chandramouleswara Rao, Ca करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

TDS deduction under section 194A on the said interest receipts without admitting the corresponding amounts received by the assessee, which is in contrary to the provisions of section 198 and 199(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI erred in holding that the interest accrued to the assessee are not taxable

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA vs. TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.335, 339, 340, 341, 342 & 343/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Dcit – Circle – 1(1) Vs. Transmission Corporation Of Cr Buildings, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Limited Vijayawada – 520002 48-12-4/1, Gunadala Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada – 520004 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabct0088P] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) सी.ओ सं. / C.O. Nos. 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 & 35/Viz/2025 [आयकर अपीलसं.से उत्पन्न/I.T.A.Nos.335, 339, 340, 341, 342 & 343/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23)] Transmission Corporation Of Vs. Dcit – Circle – 1(1) Andhra Pradesh Limited Cr Buildings, M.G. Road 48-12-4/1, Gunadala Vijayawada – 520002 Vijayawada – 520004 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabct0088P] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri M. Chandramouleswara Rao, Ca करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

TDS deduction under section 194A on the said interest receipts without admitting the corresponding amounts received by the assessee, which is in contrary to the provisions of section 198 and 199(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI erred in holding that the interest accrued to the assessee are not taxable

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA vs. TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.335, 339, 340, 341, 342 & 343/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Dcit – Circle – 1(1) Vs. Transmission Corporation Of Cr Buildings, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Limited Vijayawada – 520002 48-12-4/1, Gunadala Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada – 520004 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabct0088P] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) सी.ओ सं. / C.O. Nos. 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 & 35/Viz/2025 [आयकर अपीलसं.से उत्पन्न/I.T.A.Nos.335, 339, 340, 341, 342 & 343/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23)] Transmission Corporation Of Vs. Dcit – Circle – 1(1) Andhra Pradesh Limited Cr Buildings, M.G. Road 48-12-4/1, Gunadala Vijayawada – 520002 Vijayawada – 520004 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabct0088P] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri M. Chandramouleswara Rao, Ca करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

TDS deduction under section 194A on the said interest receipts without admitting the corresponding amounts received by the assessee, which is in contrary to the provisions of section 198 and 199(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI erred in holding that the interest accrued to the assessee are not taxable

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA vs. TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.335, 339, 340, 341, 342 & 343/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Dcit – Circle – 1(1) Vs. Transmission Corporation Of Cr Buildings, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Limited Vijayawada – 520002 48-12-4/1, Gunadala Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada – 520004 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabct0088P] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) सी.ओ सं. / C.O. Nos. 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 & 35/Viz/2025 [आयकर अपीलसं.से उत्पन्न/I.T.A.Nos.335, 339, 340, 341, 342 & 343/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23)] Transmission Corporation Of Vs. Dcit – Circle – 1(1) Andhra Pradesh Limited Cr Buildings, M.G. Road 48-12-4/1, Gunadala Vijayawada – 520002 Vijayawada – 520004 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabct0088P] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri M. Chandramouleswara Rao, Ca करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

TDS deduction under section 194A on the said interest receipts without admitting the corresponding amounts received by the assessee, which is in contrary to the provisions of section 198 and 199(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI erred in holding that the interest accrued to the assessee are not taxable

NANNEBOYINA KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (WARD IT), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.104/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2016-17) Nanneboyina Kalyan Chakravarthy V. Income Tax Officer C/O. C.R. Hemanthkumar Ward International Taxation Cr Building, 1St Floor Annex. H.No 9-14-4/7, Flat No. 7 M.G. Road, Vijayawada Sowbhagyaapartments Andhra Pradesh – 520002 Cbm Compound, Vip Road Andhra Pradesh - 530003 [Pan: Cuepk3530P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

26,72,500/- more in a savings bank account Deposit in cash aggregating to ICICI Bank Ltd., Rs.28,45,000/- Rs.2,00,000/- or more, with a banking company TDS Statement Rent Shanta Sriram Rs.7,06,501/- Infra & Cons Pvt. Ltd., TDS Statement – payment made to ICICI Bank Ltd., Rs. 78,133/- Non-residents 3. Ld. AO observed that assessee

VIVEK INDUSTRIES,VIJAYAWADA vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.133/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19) Vivek Industries, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 8-1, Kamayyathopu Kanuru, Ward-2(3), Vijayawada. Vijayawada. Pan: Aanfm5215A (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 20/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm:

TDS) using the PAN of the assessee firm, therefore, though the capital gains on the sale of the subject property was offered in the name of the individual members of the AOP that was offered for tax, but considering the fact that the tax was deducted at source in the hands of the assessee firm, the latter had raised

THE ITO(TDS) WARD-3(3), GUNTUR vs. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RURAL WATER SUPPLY PROJECT,,

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.511/Viz/2013 & 512/Viz/2013 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) Income Tax Officer (Tds) Vs. Executive Engineer Ward-3(3) Rural Water Supply Project Guntur Viswanadhapuram Podili, Prakasam Dist. [Pan : Hydro2981G] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Co No.132 & 133/Viz/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.511 & 512/Viz/2013) (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) Executive Engineer Vs. Income Tax Officer (Tds) Rural Water Supply Project Ward-3(3) Viswanadhapuram Guntur Podili, Prakasam Dist. [Pan : Hydro2981G] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

26 mandals, duly covering five assembly constituencies to supply water to the public on emergency basis, where the schemes defunct. A survey was conducted u/s 133A on 28.03.2012 in the office premises of Executive Engineer, Rural Water Supply Project, Viswanadhapuram, Podili, Prakasam District to verify the compliance to TDS provisions. During the survey, it was noticed that the assessee

NIKHIL CONSTRUCTIONS,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

section 54, the assessee has not made any TDS. In support of its argument, the Ld AR of the assessee relied on various decisions. However, not convinced with the submissions of the Ld. AR of the assessee, the Ld. AO observed that as per the development agreement out of the total extent of 444 sq yds, Sri M. Sudhakar

NIKHIL CONSTRUCTIONS, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

section 54, the assessee has not made any TDS. In support of its argument, the Ld AR of the assessee relied on various decisions. However, not convinced with the submissions of the Ld. AR of the assessee, the Ld. AO observed that as per the development agreement out of the total extent of 444 sq yds, Sri M. Sudhakar

NIKHIL CONSTRUCTIONS, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

section 54, the assessee has not made any TDS. In support of its argument, the Ld AR of the assessee relied on various decisions. However, not convinced with the submissions of the Ld. AR of the assessee, the Ld. AO observed that as per the development agreement out of the total extent of 444 sq yds, Sri M. Sudhakar

NIKHIL CONSTRUCTIONS, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2), , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

section 54, the assessee has not made any TDS. In support of its argument, the Ld AR of the assessee relied on various decisions. However, not convinced with the submissions of the Ld. AR of the assessee, the Ld. AO observed that as per the development agreement out of the total extent of 444 sq yds, Sri M. Sudhakar

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DODDI ROOPA, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.413/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Smt. Doddi Roopa, Income Tax, Visakhapatnam. Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam. Pan: Atfpr7237N (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement:

TDS) on the payments made to M/s. A.K. Capital Enterprises, as against the purchases made during the year under consideration. Accordingly, the AO, based on his conviction that 4 DCIT vs. Smt. Doddi Roopa the assessee has failed to justify the purchases of Rs. 4,99,65,247/-, passed an order under section 148A(d) of the Act, dated 29/03/2023

NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

TDS the Ld. AO ought to have disallowed the same under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. He further submitted that these expenditures were examined by the Ld. CIT(A) and allowed. He therefore pleaded that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be upheld on this issue. 49. We have heard both the sides and perused the material

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VIJAYAWADA vs. NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

TDS the Ld. AO ought to have disallowed the same under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. He further submitted that these expenditures were examined by the Ld. CIT(A) and allowed. He therefore pleaded that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be upheld on this issue. 49. We have heard both the sides and perused the material