THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1,, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ANDHRA PRADESH PAPER MILLS LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

transfer price has to be worked out on the basis of average price paid by the appellant during the year to the state Electricity Board minus extraneous charges such as electricity duty etcetera. The aforementioned deduction has to be computed after deduction of notional brought forward losses and depreciation of eligible business even though they have been allowed

THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1,, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ANDHRA PRADESH PAPER MILLS LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

transfer price has to be worked out on the basis of average price paid by the appellant during the year to the state Electricity Board minus extraneous charges such as electricity duty etcetera. The aforementioned deduction has to be computed after deduction of notional brought forward losses and depreciation of eligible business even though they have been allowed

THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1,, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ANDHRA PRADESH PAPER MILLS LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

transfer price has to be worked out on the basis of average price paid by the appellant during the year to the state Electricity Board minus extraneous charges such as electricity duty etcetera. The aforementioned deduction has to be computed after deduction of notional brought forward losses and depreciation of eligible business even though they have been allowed

GVK POWER & INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,KADIYAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1),, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.553/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2014-15) M/S Gvk Power & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.5-48, Gvk Power Plant Income Tax Jegurupadu, Kadiyammandal Circle-2(1) East Godavari Rajamahendravaram [Pan :Aaacj5599A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओ रसे/ Appellant By Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.04.2019

section 36(1)(iii) the following conditions are required to be satisfied before the assessee can successfully claim deduction in respect of interest paid : (a) The assessee should have borrowed capital; (b) The borrowing of the capital should be for the purpose of the business and (c) Interest should have been paid on the borrowing. The finding of the Tribunal

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:

80,90,000/- and if found correct, exclude the same while computing the disallowance as per Rule 8D of I.T.Rules, 1962. Aggrieved by the order passed by the AO based on the directions of the Ld.DRP, the assessee is in appeal before us and raised the following grounds : 1. The Final Assessment order incorporating Transfer Pricing adjustment passed

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

Section 80-IA provides that where an assessee, which is eligible for 80-IA benefits, transferred its goods or service to its business other than the eligible business, the consideration if any recorded for such transfer in the accounts of the eligible business, should correspond to the market value of such goods or services. Ostensibly, in this case

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

Section 80-IA provides that where an assessee, which is eligible for 80-IA benefits, transferred its goods or service to its business other than the eligible business, the consideration if any recorded for such transfer in the accounts of the eligible business, should correspond to the market value of such goods or services. Ostensibly, in this case

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

Section 80-IA provides that where an assessee, which is eligible for 80-IA benefits, transferred its goods or service to its business other than the eligible business, the consideration if any recorded for such transfer in the accounts of the eligible business, should correspond to the market value of such goods or services. Ostensibly, in this case

GVK POWER AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,JEGURUPADU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

Transfer pricing upward adjustments made by the Ld. TPO, the Ld.AO passed a draft assessment order dated 15/4/2021. Aggrieved by the draft assessment order, the assessee filed its objections before the Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel, Bengaluru [DRP]. Considering the objections of the Ld. Assessee’s Representative, the DRP in F.No. 25/DRP-1/BNG/2021-22, dated 27/01/2022 rejected the objections raised

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

BRANDIX APPARAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 5(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.627/Viz/2018 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2014-15) Brandix Apparel India Private Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, Apsez, Pudimadaka Road, Circle-5(1), Atchutapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam – 530011. Pan: Aaccb 6569 L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri Darpan Kriplani ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr

80,50,882 Ltd Brandix Essentials Ltd Reimbursement of expenses 32,64,831 Brandix Apparel Ltd Reimbursement of expenses 37,82,725 Brandix Intimate Apparel Ltd Reimbursement of expenses 74,83,898 Brandix Apparel Ltd Recovery of Pre-commencement 3,68,47,180 Brandix Apparel Ltd Liability no longer required 9,91,13,198 3. Thereafter, the case was referred

M/S, ACN INFOTECH (INDIA) PVTL LTD.,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE CIT (A),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.79/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2012-2013) M/S Acn Infotech (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1) D.No.9-14-3A, Visakhapatnam Balaji’S Mangalagiri Chambers Vip Road Visakhapatnam [Pan:Aafca7810A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Smt. Suman Malik, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14.11.2018 28.11.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

section 80-I is justified even if he had not filed the audit report in Form No. 10CCB along with the return. We, therefore, answer the question against the revenue and in favour of the assessee.” Further Hon’ble Rajasthan High court in CIT, Udaipur.v. Godha Chemicals (P) Ltd, 39 taxman.com 98 in connection with the deduction u/s80HHC took

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

80,79,080/-. Subsequently, the assessee company filed it’s revised return of income on 07.05.2016, admitting total income of Rs.8,59,91,810/- and claiming a refund of Rs.14,61,78,510/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS and a notice u/s 143(2) was issued to the assessee on 07.04.2016. Assessment order

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

80,79,080/-. Subsequently, the assessee company filed it’s revised return of income on 07.05.2016, admitting total income of Rs.8,59,91,810/- and claiming a refund of Rs.14,61,78,510/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS and a notice u/s 143(2) was issued to the assessee on 07.04.2016. Assessment order

KUMAR PAPPU SINGH,TANUKU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, , ELURU

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.270/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-2014) Sri Kumar Pappu Singh Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.23-3-26, Sundaram Nagar Income Tax, Sajjapuram Circle-1, Kks Towers, Tanuku Rr Pet, Eluru [Pan : Aeepp2496P] Andhra Pradesh (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

price paid by the assessee required to be brought to tax under the head ‘income from other sources’. 13. The Ld.AR submitted that there was no other applicant for the shares under the rights issue, hence, the company had allotted the excess shares to the assessee over and above his entitlement to his proportionate to the shareholding. The Ld.AR submitted

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. POOSARLA SATYAVATHI, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed in limine and Cross objection filed is assessee is dismissed as infructuous

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

transferring it to the assessee company as investment in share capital. He therefore stated that the sources remained unexplained and hence the addition made by the Ld. CIT(A) be sustained. 11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. From the submissions made by the Ld.AR, we find from the summary of sworn statements

LINTON PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,VIZIANAGARAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed in limine and Cross objection filed is assessee is dismissed as infructuous

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

transferring it to the assessee company as investment in share capital. He therefore stated that the sources remained unexplained and hence the addition made by the Ld. CIT(A) be sustained. 11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. From the submissions made by the Ld.AR, we find from the summary of sworn statements

ASHOK KUMAR AGRAWAL,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

80,030/- under MAT provisions. The return of income was\nsummarily processed U/s. 143(1) of the Act. A search and seizure operation\n\nPage No. 3\n\nI.T (SS). A.No.10/VIZ/2025&I.T.A.No.136/VIZ/2025\nAshok Kumar Agrawal\nΙ.Τ.Α.No.150/VIZ/2025\nSantosh Agrawal\n\nwas conducted in the Maa Mahamaya Group on 19/08/2011 in the business\npremises