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:

transfer pricing adjustment cannot be made on hypothetical and notional basis until and unless there is some material on record that there has been under charging of real income. 2.5. Without prejudice to the above, the DRP/TPO/AO erred in imputing notional interest on delayed receivables despite the fact that the primary transaction has already been tested and considered

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

transfer pricing adjustment cannot be made on hypothetical and notional basis until and unless there is some material on record that there has been under charging of real income. 3.5. The DRP/TPO/AO erred in not appreciating the fact that the appellant has not incurred any cost in providing corporate guarantee and as such the appellant cannot be expected to charge

DR KONDABOLU BASAVAPUNAIAH & DR LAKSHMI PRASAD TRUST,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), GUNTUR

250 of\nthe IT Act be set aside, and the additions made by the Assessing Officer and\nconfirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) be deleted.”\n5. The solitary grievance of the assessee is against the denial of exemption\nunder section 11 of the Act on account of violation of provisions of section\n13(1)(c) r.w.s

3F INDUSTRIES LIMITED,TADEPALLIGUDEM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

Transfer Pricing), Hyderabad for computation of Arm’s Length Price [ALP] of the transactions entered into by the assessee with its Associated Enterprises [AEs] outside India. The Ld. TPO in his report made U/s. 92CA(3) of the Act observed that during the year, the assessee has provided Corporate Guarantee on behalf of 3F Singapore and 3F Ghana

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, KAKINADA vs. SRI LALITHA ENTERPRISES INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, PEDDAPURAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

250/- to the total income of the assessee. Accordingly, assessment is completed. 5. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), assessee filed a letter dated 20/03/2018, which is reproduced as under:- "The issue in all the above mentioned appeals is common. The appellant is having a captive power plant and the appellant claimed deduction u/s 801A in respect of profit

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, KAKINADA vs. SRI LALITHA ENTERPRISES INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, PEDDAPURAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

250/- to the total income of the assessee. Accordingly, assessment is completed. 5. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), assessee filed a letter dated 20/03/2018, which is reproduced as under:- "The issue in all the above mentioned appeals is common. The appellant is having a captive power plant and the appellant claimed deduction u/s 801A in respect of profit

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, KAKINADA vs. SRI LALITHA ENTERPRISES INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, PEDDAPURAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

250/- to the total income of the assessee. Accordingly, assessment is completed. 5. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), assessee filed a letter dated 20/03/2018, which is reproduced as under:- "The issue in all the above mentioned appeals is common. The appellant is having a captive power plant and the appellant claimed deduction u/s 801A in respect of profit

DREDGING CORPORATION OF INDIA,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.211/Viz/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) M/S Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd. Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Dredge House, Hb Colony, Main Road Income Tax Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam Circle-3(1) [Pan : Aaacd6021B] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.54/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Dredging Corporation Of Income Tax India Ltd. Circle-3(1) Dredge House, Hb Colony, Visakhapatnam Main Road, Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaacd6021B] Cross Objection No.48/Viz/2021 (Arising Out Of I.T.A No.54/Viz/2021) M/S Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd. Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Dredge House, Hb Colony, Main Road Income Tax Seethammadhara Circle-3(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaacd6021B] निर्धारितऩ की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar िधजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing 18.07.2022 : घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.09.2022

250 received towards ‘sale of tender documents’ d. Rs.2,21,31,709 received towards ‘liquidated damages’. e. Rs.1,49,292 received towards ‘rent on hiring of quarters / offices’. f. Rs.10,09,086.65 towards ‘miscellaneous income’. 3. Without prejudice to the above, the appellant submits that if the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is of the view that the above

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1),, VISAKHAPTNAM vs. DREDGING CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED , VISAKHAPTNAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.211/Viz/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) M/S Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd. Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Dredge House, Hb Colony, Main Road Income Tax Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam Circle-3(1) [Pan : Aaacd6021B] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.54/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Dredging Corporation Of Income Tax India Ltd. Circle-3(1) Dredge House, Hb Colony, Visakhapatnam Main Road, Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaacd6021B] Cross Objection No.48/Viz/2021 (Arising Out Of I.T.A No.54/Viz/2021) M/S Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd. Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Dredge House, Hb Colony, Main Road Income Tax Seethammadhara Circle-3(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaacd6021B] निर्धारितऩ की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar िधजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing 18.07.2022 : घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.09.2022

250 received towards ‘sale of tender documents’ d. Rs.2,21,31,709 received towards ‘liquidated damages’. e. Rs.1,49,292 received towards ‘rent on hiring of quarters / offices’. f. Rs.10,09,086.65 towards ‘miscellaneous income’. 3. Without prejudice to the above, the appellant submits that if the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is of the view that the above

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRLCE-1(1),, GUNTUR vs. CCL PRODUCTS(INDIA) LIMITED, DUGGIRALA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

transfer pricing is a legislation seeking the tax-payers to organise their affairs in a manner compliant with the norms set-out. In short, it is an anti abuse legislation which tells you as to what is the acceptable behaviour but it does not trigger levy of tax in a retrospective manner because no party can be asked

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SRI VIJAYA VISAKHA MILK PRODUCERS COMPANY LIMITED, , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 243 & 244/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Sri Vijaya Visakha Milk Income Tax, Producers Company Limited, Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aajcs 7398 P (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) Co Nos. 18 & 19/Viz/2023 (In आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.243 & 244/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13)

transferred to MP & EEH & MW Rs. 15,00,00,315/- Trust as per the resolution passed in the general body meeting 6 Balance paid to Societies directly Rs. 131,06,81,323/- Further, it was also explained to the Ld. AO that donation was given to Employee’s Educational Health and Medical Welfare Trust (MPEEH & MW) in which

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SRI VIJAYA VISAKHA MILK PRODUCERS COMPANY LIMITED,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 243 & 244/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Sri Vijaya Visakha Milk Income Tax, Producers Company Limited, Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aajcs 7398 P (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) Co Nos. 18 & 19/Viz/2023 (In आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.243 & 244/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13)

transferred to MP & EEH & MW Rs. 15,00,00,315/- Trust as per the resolution passed in the general body meeting 6 Balance paid to Societies directly Rs. 131,06,81,323/- Further, it was also explained to the Ld. AO that donation was given to Employee’s Educational Health and Medical Welfare Trust (MPEEH & MW) in which

NATTA SURYA RAO,TANUKU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TANUKU

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.404/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2009-10) Natta Suryarao Vs. Income Tax Officer S/O Late Manganna Ward-1 D.No.2-20-5 Tanuku Ambati Vari Street Old Town, Tanuku [Pan :Ahrpn 9648M] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri.Y.Ratnakar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Smt.Suman Malik, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04 .10.2019 आदेश /O R D E R

section 45(2) of the Act and as to why the exemption claimed u/s 54F should not be disallowed? Since, the assessee did not satisfy the conditions for allowing the deduction u/s 54F of the Act. In response there to, the assessee filed a letter stating that he is an agriculturist and not having any residential house, sold the agricultural

ITO, WARD-3(3),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SHRI K V V PRASAD,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.375/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09) Income Tax Officer Vs. Smt.Siripurapu Chinatalli Ward-3(3) D.No.9-16-37/2 Visakhapatnam Gurajada Enclave Cbm Compound Visakhapatnam [Pan : Agrpc1150E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.457/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Income Tax Officer Vs. Shri K.V.V.Prasad Ward-3(3) Plot No.301, Vytla Residency Visakhapatnam Balajinagar Siripuram Visakhapatnam (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 24.01.2019 : 13.02.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement

price where risk and margins are high. Therefore, the purchase of land in question can no way be termed as an investment but is only a stock in trade. 8. The consideration received by the assessee represented consideration received in relinquishment of rights acquired through an agreement entered into with RK Mittal. Even the buyers M/s Fortune Infra

ITO, WARD-3(3),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SIRIPURAPU CHINATALLI,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.375/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09) Income Tax Officer Vs. Smt.Siripurapu Chinatalli Ward-3(3) D.No.9-16-37/2 Visakhapatnam Gurajada Enclave Cbm Compound Visakhapatnam [Pan : Agrpc1150E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.457/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Income Tax Officer Vs. Shri K.V.V.Prasad Ward-3(3) Plot No.301, Vytla Residency Visakhapatnam Balajinagar Siripuram Visakhapatnam (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 24.01.2019 : 13.02.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement

price where risk and margins are high. Therefore, the purchase of land in question can no way be termed as an investment but is only a stock in trade. 8. The consideration received by the assessee represented consideration received in relinquishment of rights acquired through an agreement entered into with RK Mittal. Even the buyers M/s Fortune Infra

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

250/-. Ld. AO also observed various investments made by the\nDirectors of the Company arising out of unaccounted cash generation. Further,\nit was also noticed by the Ld. AO, the assessee in response to notice under section\n142(1) dated 27.04.2023 has claimed 15% of discount on sale of suppressed eggs\nreferred in incriminating material in the form of printed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT. LTD, GUNTUR

250/-. Ld. AO also observed various investments made by the\nDirectors of the Company arising out of unaccounted cash generation. Further,\nit was also noticed by the Ld. AO, the assessee in response to notice under section\n142(1) dated 27.04.2023 has claimed 15% of discount on sale of suppressed eggs\nreferred in incriminating material in the form of printed

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

250/-. Ld. AO also observed various investments made by the\nDirectors of the Company arising out of unaccounted cash generation. Further,\nit was also noticed by the Ld. AO, the assessee in response to notice under section\n142(1) dated 27.04.2023 has claimed 15% of discount on sale of suppressed eggs\nreferred in incriminating material in the form of printed