MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 36(1)(iii). 5. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in allowing relief towards proportionate disallowance of interest

MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 36(1)(iii). 5. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in allowing relief towards proportionate disallowance of interest

MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 36(1)(iii). 5. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in allowing relief towards proportionate disallowance of interest

MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 36(1)(iii). 5. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in allowing relief towards proportionate disallowance of interest

RANAR AGROCHEM LIMITED,PARAWADA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.288/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15) Ranar Agrochem Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaccp0372M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M. Madhusudan, Ca (Hybrid) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Jenardhanan V, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 14/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 31/10/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Company Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 15/05/2024, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “A.O.”) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”) Dated 30/12/2016 For A.Y.

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the assessee’s claim for deduction of the delayed deposit of the employees

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GUNTUBOLU UMA SAI PRASAD, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

disallowance U/s. 36(1)(va) has been made while processing the return U/s. 143(1) of the Act claiming it to be an incorrect claim 7 as defined U/s. 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. The Ld. AR further submitted that the Explanation to section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GUNTUBOLU UMA SAI PRASAD, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

disallowance U/s. 36(1)(va) has been made while processing the return U/s. 143(1) of the Act claiming it to be an incorrect claim 7 as defined U/s. 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. The Ld. AR further submitted that the Explanation to section

GUNTUBOLU UMA SAI PRASAD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

disallowance U/s. 36(1)(va) has been made while processing the return U/s. 143(1) of the Act claiming it to be an incorrect claim 7 as defined U/s. 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. The Ld. AR further submitted that the Explanation to section

VISAKHAPATNAM INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLY COMPANY LTD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.137, 138 & 139/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08) Visakhapatnam Industrial Water V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Circle – 4(1) Supply Company Limited Income Tax Office C/O. Gvmc, Room No. 204 Pratyakshakar Bhavan Teneti Bhavan, Asilmetta Junction Mvp Double Road Visakhapatnam – 530002 Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabcv2240H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 229/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Visakhapatnam Industrial Water V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Circle – 5(1) Supply Company Limited Income Tax Office C/O. Gvmc, Room No. 204 Pratyakshakar Bhavan Teneti Bhavan, Asilmetta Junction Mvp Double Road Visakhapatnam – 530002 Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabcv2240H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 36(1)(viii) of the Act provides the specified entity an opportunity of deduction of profit from the eligible business which is carried to a reserve account. However, it is not mandatory to claim such deduction and it cannot be considered as a pre-requisite for disallowing

VISAKHAPATNAM INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLY COMPANY LTD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.137, 138 & 139/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08) Visakhapatnam Industrial Water V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Circle – 4(1) Supply Company Limited Income Tax Office C/O. Gvmc, Room No. 204 Pratyakshakar Bhavan Teneti Bhavan, Asilmetta Junction Mvp Double Road Visakhapatnam – 530002 Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabcv2240H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 229/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Visakhapatnam Industrial Water V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Circle – 5(1) Supply Company Limited Income Tax Office C/O. Gvmc, Room No. 204 Pratyakshakar Bhavan Teneti Bhavan, Asilmetta Junction Mvp Double Road Visakhapatnam – 530002 Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabcv2240H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 36(1)(viii) of the Act provides the specified entity an opportunity of deduction of profit from the eligible business which is carried to a reserve account. However, it is not mandatory to claim such deduction and it cannot be considered as a pre-requisite for disallowing

VISAKHAPATNAM INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLY COMPANY LTD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.137, 138 & 139/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08) Visakhapatnam Industrial Water V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Circle – 4(1) Supply Company Limited Income Tax Office C/O. Gvmc, Room No. 204 Pratyakshakar Bhavan Teneti Bhavan, Asilmetta Junction Mvp Double Road Visakhapatnam – 530002 Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabcv2240H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 229/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Visakhapatnam Industrial Water V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Circle – 5(1) Supply Company Limited Income Tax Office C/O. Gvmc, Room No. 204 Pratyakshakar Bhavan Teneti Bhavan, Asilmetta Junction Mvp Double Road Visakhapatnam – 530002 Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabcv2240H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 36(1)(viii) of the Act provides the specified entity an opportunity of deduction of profit from the eligible business which is carried to a reserve account. However, it is not mandatory to claim such deduction and it cannot be considered as a pre-requisite for disallowing

VISAKHAPATNAM INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLY COMPANY LTD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.137, 138 & 139/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08) Visakhapatnam Industrial Water V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Circle – 4(1) Supply Company Limited Income Tax Office C/O. Gvmc, Room No. 204 Pratyakshakar Bhavan Teneti Bhavan, Asilmetta Junction Mvp Double Road Visakhapatnam – 530002 Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabcv2240H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 229/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Visakhapatnam Industrial Water V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Circle – 5(1) Supply Company Limited Income Tax Office C/O. Gvmc, Room No. 204 Pratyakshakar Bhavan Teneti Bhavan, Asilmetta Junction Mvp Double Road Visakhapatnam – 530002 Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabcv2240H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 36(1)(viii) of the Act provides the specified entity an opportunity of deduction of profit from the eligible business which is carried to a reserve account. However, it is not mandatory to claim such deduction and it cannot be considered as a pre-requisite for disallowing

SSNR PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.150/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Ssnr Projects Private Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of D.No.51-8-40, Behind Boc Limited Income Tax Seethammadhara Circle-3(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam Pan : Aarcs2464C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

disallowed under section 36(1)(va). 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned Commissioner

DASARI BUJJI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.20/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Dasari Bujji Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.40-54-5/31 Ward-1(1) Sanjeevayya Colony, Visakhapatnam Near Bethadha Church, Tatichetlapalem, Visakhapatnam [Pan : Bklpd8566J]

36(1)(va) and section 43B are applicable w.e.f. 01.04.2021 i.e.A.Y.2022-23 and do not apply for the year under consideration. He further contended that the assessee is not covered under any clauses of section 143(1) of the Act, mentioned therein. The assessee pleaded to set aside the disallowance

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

Section 40A(3) of the Act out of the expenditure incurred under patient refund account without bringing any corroborative evidences of such nature of payment. 4. The Learned CIT (Appeals) is not justified in directing the AO to estimate disallowance @ 25% out of the expenditure claimed under referral payments of Rs.34,84,567/- without any basis and any justifiable evidence

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

Section 40A(3) of the Act out of the expenditure incurred under patient refund account without bringing any corroborative evidences of such nature of payment. 4. The Learned CIT (Appeals) is not justified in directing the AO to estimate disallowance @ 25% out of the expenditure claimed under referral payments of Rs.34,84,567/- without any basis and any justifiable evidence

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

Section 40A(3) of the Act out of the expenditure incurred under patient refund account without bringing any corroborative evidences of such nature of payment. 4. The Learned CIT (Appeals) is not justified in directing the AO to estimate disallowance @ 25% out of the expenditure claimed under referral payments of Rs.34,84,567/- without any basis and any justifiable evidence

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

Section 40A(3) of the Act out of the expenditure incurred under patient refund account without bringing any corroborative evidences of such nature of payment. 4. The Learned CIT (Appeals) is not justified in directing the AO to estimate disallowance @ 25% out of the expenditure claimed under referral payments of Rs.34,84,567/- without any basis and any justifiable evidence

NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VIJAYAWADA

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

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

Section 40A(3) of the Act out of the expenditure incurred under patient refund account without bringing any corroborative evidences of such nature of payment. 4. The Learned CIT (Appeals) is not justified in directing the AO to estimate disallowance @ 25% out of the expenditure claimed under referral payments of Rs.34,84,567/- without any basis and any justifiable evidence