DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue, viz

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.

disallowance under Section 14A r.w Rule 8D of Rs. 15,42,448/-. 11. Accordingly, the AO vide his order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 20/09/2021, determined the income of the assessee company at Rs. 50,14,81,765/-. 12. Aggrieved, the assessee company carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A), who after

DCIT, CIRCLE -3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue, viz

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.

disallowance under Section 14A r.w Rule 8D of Rs. 15,42,448/-. 11. Accordingly, the AO vide his order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 20/09/2021, determined the income of the assessee company at Rs. 50,14,81,765/-. 12. Aggrieved, the assessee company carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A), who after

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ALFA ELECTRONIC SERVICES(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPTNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos. 50, 51 & 53/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Acit – Circle – 1(1) V. M/S. Alfa Electronic Services (India) Prathyakshakar Bhavan, Sector – 8 Private Limited Mvp Double Road, 49-22-5, Sri Sai Mansions Visakhapatnam – 530017 Lalitha Nagar, Visakhapatnam – 530016 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aahca3583E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

95,620/-. Subsequently, notice under section 143(2) of the Actdated 06.11.2017 and notice under section 142(1) of the Actdated 28.08.2018 wereissued along with questionnaire calling for certain information/details thorough ITBA portal. In response, assessee has not complied to the notices. In view of non-compliance to the notices, the assessee was served with a notice to show cause

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ALFA ELECTRONIC SERVICES(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos. 50, 51 & 53/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Acit – Circle – 1(1) V. M/S. Alfa Electronic Services (India) Prathyakshakar Bhavan, Sector – 8 Private Limited Mvp Double Road, 49-22-5, Sri Sai Mansions Visakhapatnam – 530017 Lalitha Nagar, Visakhapatnam – 530016 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aahca3583E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

95,620/-. Subsequently, notice under section 143(2) of the Actdated 06.11.2017 and notice under section 142(1) of the Actdated 28.08.2018 wereissued along with questionnaire calling for certain information/details thorough ITBA portal. In response, assessee has not complied to the notices. In view of non-compliance to the notices, the assessee was served with a notice to show cause

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ALFA ELECTRONIC SERVICES(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPTNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos. 50, 51 & 53/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Acit – Circle – 1(1) V. M/S. Alfa Electronic Services (India) Prathyakshakar Bhavan, Sector – 8 Private Limited Mvp Double Road, 49-22-5, Sri Sai Mansions Visakhapatnam – 530017 Lalitha Nagar, Visakhapatnam – 530016 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aahca3583E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

95,620/-. Subsequently, notice under section 143(2) of the Actdated 06.11.2017 and notice under section 142(1) of the Actdated 28.08.2018 wereissued along with questionnaire calling for certain information/details thorough ITBA portal. In response, assessee has not complied to the notices. In view of non-compliance to the notices, the assessee was served with a notice to show cause

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:

section 14A of the Act will not be applicable. 4.3. Without prejudice to the above, while computing the average value of investments under Rule 8D(ii), the AO ought to have excluded the investments which did not yield dividend income. 5. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, substitute, rescind, modify and / or withdraw in any manner whatsoever

ACE URBAN DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. AO, VIJAYAWADA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.79, 118 & 284/Viz/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2016-17) Ace Urban Developers Private Limited V. The Asst. Cit- Circle-2(1) Module No. A1, A2,A3 Vijayawada – 520002 Quadrant No. 4, 4Thfloor Andhra Pradesh Cyber Tower, Hitech City Madhapur B.O. Sheikpet, Hyderabad-500081, Telangana [Pan: Aanca4001H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Sk Gupta,Ar राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व / Department Represented By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Sr.Ar

disallowance under section 14A shall be deleted. Ld. AR placed heavy reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Chettinad LogisticsP. Ltd., [2018] 95

ACE URBAN DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. AO, NFAC

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.79, 118 & 284/Viz/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2016-17) Ace Urban Developers Private Limited V. The Asst. Cit- Circle-2(1) Module No. A1, A2,A3 Vijayawada – 520002 Quadrant No. 4, 4Thfloor Andhra Pradesh Cyber Tower, Hitech City Madhapur B.O. Sheikpet, Hyderabad-500081, Telangana [Pan: Aanca4001H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Sk Gupta,Ar राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व / Department Represented By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Sr.Ar

disallowance under section 14A shall be deleted. Ld. AR placed heavy reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Chettinad LogisticsP. Ltd., [2018] 95

ACE URBAN DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), VIJAYAWADA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.79, 118 & 284/Viz/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2016-17) Ace Urban Developers Private Limited V. The Asst. Cit- Circle-2(1) Module No. A1, A2,A3 Vijayawada – 520002 Quadrant No. 4, 4Thfloor Andhra Pradesh Cyber Tower, Hitech City Madhapur B.O. Sheikpet, Hyderabad-500081, Telangana [Pan: Aanca4001H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Sk Gupta,Ar राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व / Department Represented By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Sr.Ar

disallowance under section 14A shall be deleted. Ld. AR placed heavy reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Chettinad LogisticsP. Ltd., [2018] 95

ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI PRAKASH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, TUNI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue for the

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

disallowance u/s 40(ba) of the Act is applicable in case of assessee other than societies. For ready reference, we reproduce section 40BA of the Act, which reads as under: Amounts not deductible. 40. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in sections 30 to 95

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS,, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI PRAKASHA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,, TUNII

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue for the

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

disallowance u/s 40(ba) of the Act is applicable in case of assessee other than societies. For ready reference, we reproduce section 40BA of the Act, which reads as under: Amounts not deductible. 40. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in sections 30 to 95

ACIT, (EXEMPTIONS), EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI PRAKASH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,, TUNI,

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue for the

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

disallowance u/s 40(ba) of the Act is applicable in case of assessee other than societies. For ready reference, we reproduce section 40BA of the Act, which reads as under: Amounts not deductible. 40. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in sections 30 to 95

PADMASREE STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED,RAVULAPALEM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, KAKINADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.292/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year:2018-19) Vs. Dcit – Circle –1 Padmasree Steels Private Limited Rs No. 109 & 110 Devarapalli 3Rd Floor, Deepthi Towers Main Road Ravulapalem – 533238 Kakinada – 533001 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aadcp2642P]

95,147/-. The return was summarily processed under section 143(1) of the Act on 24.05.2019 and subsequently rectified on 28.11.2019. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under e-assessment scheme for the issue “Excess Contribution to Provident Furn, Superannuation Fund or Gratuity Fund”. Accordingly, notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 2(1), GUNTUR vs. TULASI SEEDS PRIVATE LIMITED, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.169/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Tulasi Seeds Private Limited 3Rd Floor, Standard House, Beside Sbi Door No. 6-4-6, Tulasi House Nagarampalem, Guntur – 522004 4/5 Arundelpet, Guntur Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan : Aaact8054C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

95,510/-. The return was summarily processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices under section 142(1) and 143(2) of the Act were issued and duly served on the assessee. In response to the notice’s, assessee furnished various information called for from time to time

THE ELURU COOPERATIVE HOUSE MORTGAGE SOCIETY LTD.,,ELURU vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, ELURU

Bench: Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 225 & 226/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष/ Assessment Years:2015-16 & 2016-17) The Eluru Cooperative House Mortgage Society Limited Gopaluvari Street, Powerpet Station Road R.R.Pet, Eluru, West Godavari – 534002 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aacat0060G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Income Tax Officer – Ward-1 Income Tax Office 23-B-4-6/4, Κ.K.S. Towers. R.R. Pet Eluru, Andhra Pradesh (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतिनिधित्व / Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतिनिधित्व / Department Represented By Shri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar सुनवाई समाप्त होने की तिथि/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 15.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.09.2025 आदेश / Order Per Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail: 1. The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeals Against The Separate Impugned Orders Of Even Date 28.06.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘Act') By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act') by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), I.T.A. No. 225 & 226/VIZ/2023 The Eluru Cooperative House Mortgage Society Limited National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter in short "Ld.CIT(A)"] for the A.Ys. 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. Since both the appeals pertain to the same assessee involving similar issues

THE ELURU COOPERATIVE HOUSE MORTGAGE SOCIETY LIMITED,ELURU vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, ELURU

Bench: Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 225 & 226/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष/ Assessment Years:2015-16 & 2016-17) The Eluru Cooperative House Mortgage Society Limited Gopaluvari Street, Powerpet Station Road R.R.Pet, Eluru, West Godavari – 534002 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aacat0060G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Income Tax Officer – Ward-1 Income Tax Office 23-B-4-6/4, Κ.K.S. Towers. R.R. Pet Eluru, Andhra Pradesh (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतिनिधित्व / Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतिनिधित्व / Department Represented By Shri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar सुनवाई समाप्त होने की तिथि/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 15.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.09.2025 आदेश /Order Per Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail: 1. The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeals Against The Separate Impugned Orders Of Even Date 28.06.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘Act') By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act') by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), I.T.A. No. 225 & 226/VIZ/2023 The Eluru Cooperative House Mortgage Society Limited National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter in short "Ld.CIT(A)"] for the A.Ys. 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. Since both the appeals pertain to the same assessee involving similar issues

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. MINIMET REFRACORY SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.476/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2009-10) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Minimet Refractory Income Tax Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Circle-3(1) (Formerly Known As Almag Visakhapatnam Marketting (India) Pvt. Ltd.) 101-B, Sri Venkateswara Towers, 5Th Lane, Dwaraka Nagar Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aafca5872N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Co No.134/Viz/2018 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.476/Viz/2018) (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2009-10) M/S Minimet Refractory Solutions Asst.Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax (Formerly Known As Almag Marketting Circle-3(1) (India) Pvt. Ltd.) Visakhapatnam 101-B, Sri Venkateswara Towers, 5Th Lane, Dwaraka Nagar Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aafca5872N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt Suman Malik, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 09.04.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23 .04.2019

95,670/- and export sales of Rs.20,05,69,300/-. Since profit and loss account was consisting of both the domestic sales as well as the export sales, the AO was under the opinion that the assessee has not maintained the separate books of accounts for export sales pertaining to the unit which was located at Visakhapatnam Special Economic Zone

R.S. PABBLA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT.LTD.,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DY. CIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

95,350/-. Similarly for the A.Y. 2014-15 certain additions amounting to Rs. 6,98,71,035/- were made towards unexplained labour credits. It is also noted that the assessee failed to produce confirmation letters from both labour and material contractors. 5 6. Aggrieved by the above additions, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A). Before the ld.CIT