DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GVA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DHAMTARI

221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited --\nincome in response to notice under section148 of the Act. Subsequently, notice\nunder section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 22.11.2021. In the statement\nrecorded during the survey proceedings, the three suppliers have stated that they\nhave never supplied any material and have provided only accommodation\nentries. The assessee

DEVI SEA FOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE -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.156/Viz/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) M/S Devi Sea Foods Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of 50-1-51/1, A.S.R.Nagar Income Tax Seethammadhara Circle-3(I) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aabcd0248B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.Anand, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 01.12.2022 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2022 O R D E R Per Shri S.Balakrishnan:

1% rate of corporate guarantee determined by DRP is high and arbitrary. 9. The issue raised in the Grounds of Appeal is with respect to adjustments made by the TPO/DRP in the corporate guarantee commission on the gross guarantee given to AE. The Ld. AR pleaded that it is not an international transaction as the assessee has not charged

GVA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited --\nincome in response to notice under section148 of the Act. Subsequently, notice\nunder section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 22.11.2021. In the statement\nrecorded during the survey proceedings, the three suppliers have stated that they\nhave never supplied any material and have provided only accommodation\nentries. The assessee

GVA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited\nincome in response to notice under section148 of the Act. Subsequently, notice\nunder section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 22.11.2021. In the statement\nrecorded during the survey proceedings, the three suppliers have stated that they\nhave never supplied any material and have provided only accommodation\nentries. The assessee

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT LTD, GUNTUR

221/- for the period 11.01.2021 to 31.03.2021 and\nRs.2,27,59,489/- for the period of 01.04.2021 to 06.12.2021 reflecting the sales\nfrom unaccounted suppressing eggs from Unit-1, Chinnakondrupadu (V),\nPrathipadu (M), Guntur. Similarly, the unaccounted sales were quantified by the\nLd. AO for various branches.\nPage No. 5\nITA Nos. 228, 229, 230 & 231/VIZ/2025\nC.O

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT. LTD., GUNTUR

221/- for the period 11.01.2021 to 31.03.2021 and\nRs.2,27,59,489/- for the period of 01.04.2021 to 06.12.2021 reflecting the sales\nfrom unaccounted suppressing eggs from Unit-1, Chinnakondrupadu (V),\nPrathipadu (M), Guntur. Similarly, the unaccounted sales were quantified by the\nLd. AO for various branches.\nPage No. 5\n7. Ld. AO during the course of assessment proceedings also

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GVA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DHAMTARI

221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited --\nincome in response to notice under section148 of the Act. Subsequently, notice\nunder section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 22.11.2021. In the statement\nrecorded during the survey proceedings, the three suppliers have stated that they\nhave never supplied any material and have provided only accommodation\nentries. The assessee

GVA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited\nincome in response to notice under section148 of the Act. Subsequently, notice\nunder section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 22.11.2021. In the statement\nrecorded during the survey proceedings, the three suppliers have stated that they\nhave never supplied any material and have provided only accommodation\nentries. The assessee

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DEVI FISHERIES LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

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

221), the Hon'ble Court has held that "Rule 8D (M/s. Devi Fisheries Ltd.) can't be read in a manner in which it takes the scope beyond the provisions of section 14A". 4.1.7 The Hon'ble ITAT, Visakhapatnam in the case of Radhakrishna Automobiles Pvt.Ltd. (ITA No.511/Vizag/2017) and D.Veerabhadra Reddy (ITA No.263/Vizag/2017) have held that "in order to invoke

KPR AGROCHEM LIMITED,BALABHADRAPURAM vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, KAKINADA

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

221-223/Viz/2022 A.Y.2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s KPR Agrochem Ltd., East Godavari not necessary that exempt income should necessarily be included in a particular year’s income for the disallowance. The assessee further submitted that this would be truncated reading of section 14A and rule 8D particularly when rule 8D(1

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, KAKINADA vs. KPR AGROCHEM LIMITED, BALABHADRAPURAM

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

221-223/Viz/2022 A.Y.2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s KPR Agrochem Ltd., East Godavari not necessary that exempt income should necessarily be included in a particular year’s income for the disallowance. The assessee further submitted that this would be truncated reading of section 14A and rule 8D particularly when rule 8D(1

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, , KAKINADA vs. KPR AGROCHEM LIMITED, BALABHADRAPURAM

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

221-223/Viz/2022 A.Y.2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s KPR Agrochem Ltd., East Godavari not necessary that exempt income should necessarily be included in a particular year’s income for the disallowance. The assessee further submitted that this would be truncated reading of section 14A and rule 8D particularly when rule 8D(1

KPR AGROCHEM LIMITED,BALABHADRAPURAM vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, KAKINADA

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

221-223/Viz/2022 A.Y.2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s KPR Agrochem Ltd., East Godavari not necessary that exempt income should necessarily be included in a particular year’s income for the disallowance. The assessee further submitted that this would be truncated reading of section 14A and rule 8D particularly when rule 8D(1

KPR AGROCHEM LIMITED,BALABHADRAPURAM vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, KAKINADA

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

221-223/Viz/2022 A.Y.2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s KPR Agrochem Ltd., East Godavari not necessary that exempt income should necessarily be included in a particular year’s income for the disallowance. The assessee further submitted that this would be truncated reading of section 14A and rule 8D particularly when rule 8D(1

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT. LTD., GUNTUR

221/- for the period 11.01.2021 to 31.03.2021 and\nRs.2,27,59,489/- for the period of 01.04.2021 to 06.12.2021 reflecting the sales\nfrom unaccounted suppressing eggs from Unit-1, Chinnakondrupadu (V),\nPrathipadu (M), Guntur. Similarly, the unaccounted sales were quantified by the\nLd. AO for various branches.\nPage No. 5\nITA Nos. 228, 229, 230 & 231/VIZ/2025\nC.O

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), , VIJAYAWADA vs. CARE AND SHARE CHARITABLE TRUST, , VIJAYAWADA

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

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

221 and Girls: 108) in the school with a staff of 25 (Men: 11 and Women: 14) 7.7 Night Shelter: The Night Shelter for boys is run in a school building of the Vijayawada Municipal Corporation near the Benz Circle area. This provides a rof over their heads for boys who are on the streets. n opportunity for boys

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GATEWAY EAST INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

section 129 of the Act, fresh opportunity of being heard was accorded to the assessee vide letter dated 06/08/2019. Subsequently, notice U/s. 142(1) of the Act along with the detailed questionnaire was issued to the assessee on 30/08/2019 calling for detailed information. In response, the assessee furnished its submissions from time to time. On perusal of the submissions

DEVI SEA FOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.75/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Devi Sea Foods Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Visakhapatnam. Income Tax, Pan: Aabcd 0248 B Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant By : Sri D. Anand, Advocate ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Respondent By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

1% on the corporate guarantee given to AEs. The Ld. DR further submitted that the Ld. DRP has rightly considered the Notification (supra) and thereby upheld the ALP rate of 1.9% 14 adopted by the Ld. TPO in respect of adjustment made to the corporate guarantee given to AE. The Ld. DR therefore pleaded that the order of the Ld.DRP