← All Phrases

“mis-reporting of income”

PenaltySection 270ASection 270A132 judgments

The decision most relied on for mis-reporting of income is CIT v. Surendra Prasad Agrawal (275 ITR 113), cited in 38 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on mis-reporting of income

CIT v. Surendra Prasad Agrawal
275 ITR 113 · 2005 · High Court
38
citing judgments

The omission by an Income Tax Officer to initiate penalty proceedings during the assessment, when there is an observation of under-reporting or mis-reporting of income, renders the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, granting the Commissioner jurisdiction to revise such an order under Section 263.

Schneider Electric South East Asia (HQ) PTE Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) & Ors.
443 ITR 186 · 2022 · High Court
29
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, cannot be imposed if the Assessing Officer fails to specify which clause under Section 270A(9) applies and fails to show cause to the assessee accordingly. Strict adherence to the conditions of Section 270A is mandatory for its applicability.

Alrameez Construction (P.) Ltd. v. NFAC
152 Taxmann.com 382 · 2023 · ITAT
14
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 270A for under-reporting or mis-reporting of income cannot be sustained if additions are made under Section 56(2)(x) and the penalty notice fails to specify the limb under which proceedings are initiated.

Judgments citing mis-reporting of income

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Nashik vs. Chakradhar Contractors and Engineers Private Limited, Jalgaon

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are

ITA 1939/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 270ASection 270A(3)(i)Section 270A(6)(a)Section 270A(9)

further argued by the assessee that the Assessing Officer has levied the penalty without giving details of exact clause of mis-reporting of income under which he 5 ITA.Nos.1939 & 1940/PUN./2024 wanted to charge the assessee company. Since the Assessing Officer has failed to mention both in the assessment ... expenses, the assessee falls under the purview of provisions of sec.270A(3) as well as 270A(9) of the Act. Since there was mis-reporting of income as well as under-reporting of income, the Assessing Officer was fully justified in levying the impugned penalty u/sec.270A

Arif Hussain, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1274/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Sri V. Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 144Section 250Section 270ASection 27CSection 69A

dated 30/1 1/2019 for initiating penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act for under-reporting of income in consequence of mis-reporting of income for which notice has been issued to the appellant and therefore, the very initiation of the proceedings suffers from an infirmity and consequently, the order imposing ... since the assessee has not furnished the return of income for AY 2017-18, despite having taxable income from business, the assessee has mis-reported the income resulting in under reporting of income and accordingly, penalty u/s 270A of the Act is initiated separately. Thereafter, after the completion

Kag India Private Limited, Chennai vs. PCIT Central Circle -2, Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1366/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1366/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 The Pcit (Central), M/S. Kag India Pvt Ltd., V. Chennai -2. No. 264/15-1, Sathiyanathan Complex, Velachery Road, East Tambaram, Chennai – 600 059. [Pan: Aadck-5381-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 263Section 270ASection 270A(9)(e)Section 271(1)

1366/Chny/2024 words, the Assessing Officer has been directed to initiate penalty u/s.270A(9)(e) of the Act, which enacts cases of mis-reporting of income of referred to in section 270A(8) of the Act inter alia for failure to record any receipt in books of accounts having a bearing ... also fails because, the penalty is computed @50% of the amount of tax payable on the under-reported income in consequence to mis-reporting of income or @200%of the amount of tax payable on the under-reported income in consequence to mis- reporting of income. So, without computing “under

Advik Hi Tech Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Dy.Comm..of Incometax, Circle 8, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1344/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 270ASection 270A(10)Section 270A(7)

above clauses. He submitted that once it is to be held that there is no under- reporting of income, the question of mis-reporting of income does not arise. He accordingly submitted that the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) 10 ITA.No.1344/PUN

Rakesh Fatechand Jain, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer, Assessment Unit (National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2795/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2018-19 Mr. Rakesh Fatechand Jain Assessing Officer, Assessment Unit, National Shop No. 140, Kherwadi Market, Vs E-Assessment Centre, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051. Delhi Pan: Afjpj 0418 D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kunal D. LunawatFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(2)Section 50CSection 50C(2)

270A of the Act placed in the paper book, it is noticed that the AO has not specified any of the circumstances of mis-reporting of income mentioned in section 270A(2) of the Act as under: “a. Mispresentation or suppression of facts; b. Failure to record investments

Aditya Birla Private Equity Trust, Maharashtra vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi(Income Tax Officer 20(1)(1), Mumbai), Maharashtra

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 890/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 1Section 10Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234B

consequence of misreporting of income in the return of income. Accordingly, penalty proceedings are initiated u/s 270A of the Act separately for mis-reporting of income 10 Aditya Birla Private Equity Trust, Mumbai 16. Dividend income exempt u/s 10(35). During the year the assessee trust has earned Dividend income

ACIT, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Incredible India Projects Private Limited, Secunderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19 are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 604/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.604 & 605/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Acit Vs. Incredible India Projects Central Circle-2(4) Private Limited Hyderabad Secunderabad [Pan : Aabci9355A] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Sandeep Goel, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri B.Bala Krishna, Cit, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of 19/09/2024 Hearing: घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2024 आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Separate, But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Learned Cit(A)]-12, Hyderabad, Both Dated 30/08/2022, Pertaining To A.Y.2017-18 & 2018-19. Since The Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Goel, ARFor Respondent: : Shri B.Bala Krishna, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 270ASection 270A(2)Section 270A(9)(d)Section 271ASection 274

deceive or mislead. This was not the case here. Therefore, held that the appellant’s case is not covered under the provisions of mis-reporting of income as listed in Section 270A(9)(d) of the Act and hence directed the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty levied u/s 270A

Smita Virendra Lodha, Ahmednagar vs. ITO, Ward-1, Ahmednagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1980/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Prasad BhandariFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 270A

returned of Rs.18,74,800/-. However, he initiated penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act for under-reporting of income in consequence of mis-reporting of income. 4. During the course of such penalty proceedings the assessee filed a detailed reply submitting that the penalty u/s 270A ... assessee that the penalty notice issued by the Assessing Officer is silent about the clause under which the assessee has under-reported or mis-reported the income. 11. We find some force in the above arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. We find the Co-ordinate Bench

Mother Theressa Educational Society, Amalapuram vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption Circle, Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 229/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

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

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 270ASection 274Section 80G

permission of the Hon'ble Tribunal.” 6. The only contention of the revenue is with respect to deletion of penalty on the mis-reporting of income by the assessee which is not allowed under section 11(6) of the Act. The Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] by placing

ACIT, Exemption Circle, Vijayawada vs. Mother Theressa Educational Society, Chaitanyanagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 163/VIZ/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Oct 2024

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

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 270ASection 274Section 80G

permission of the Hon'ble Tribunal.” 6. The only contention of the revenue is with respect to deletion of penalty on the mis-reporting of income by the assessee which is not allowed under section 11(6) of the Act. The Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] by placing

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Sylns Agro Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the Revenue

ITA 405/HYD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No. Assessee Respondent A.Y 1 381/Hyd/2023 Acit Central Circle Bhoomika Agro 2020-21 2(2) Hyderabad Farms (P) Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 2 382/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 3 Co 7/Hyd/2023 Bhoomika Agro Acit Central Circle 2020-21 (Ita 381/H/23) Farms (P) Ltd 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 4 Co 8/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 382/H/23) 5 385/Hyd/2023 -Do- Sunshine Estate 2019-20 Construction India Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 6 386/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 7 387/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2022-22 8 Co3/Hyd/2023 Sunshine Estate Acit Central Circle 2019-20 (Ita 385/H/23) Construction India 2(2) Hyderabad Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 9 Co4/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 (Ita 386/H/23) 10 Co5/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 387/H/23) 11 388/Hyd/2023 -Do- Krishi Housing (P) 2017-18 Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B 12 389/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2018-19 13 390/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2019-20 14 391/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 15 392/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 16 Co9/Hyd/2023 Krishi Housing (P) Acit Central Circle 2017-18 (Ita 388/H/23) Ltd Hyderabad 2(2) Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B

camouflaging of total receipts as commission and hence this argument of the assessee cannot be accepted. Penalty u/s. 270A are initiated for mis-reporting of income.” 6. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT (A). Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Sylns Agro Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the Revenue

ITA 404/HYD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No. Assessee Respondent A.Y 1 381/Hyd/2023 Acit Central Circle Bhoomika Agro 2020-21 2(2) Hyderabad Farms (P) Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 2 382/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 3 Co 7/Hyd/2023 Bhoomika Agro Acit Central Circle 2020-21 (Ita 381/H/23) Farms (P) Ltd 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 4 Co 8/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 382/H/23) 5 385/Hyd/2023 -Do- Sunshine Estate 2019-20 Construction India Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 6 386/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 7 387/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2022-22 8 Co3/Hyd/2023 Sunshine Estate Acit Central Circle 2019-20 (Ita 385/H/23) Construction India 2(2) Hyderabad Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 9 Co4/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 (Ita 386/H/23) 10 Co5/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 387/H/23) 11 388/Hyd/2023 -Do- Krishi Housing (P) 2017-18 Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B 12 389/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2018-19 13 390/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2019-20 14 391/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 15 392/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 16 Co9/Hyd/2023 Krishi Housing (P) Acit Central Circle 2017-18 (Ita 388/H/23) Ltd Hyderabad 2(2) Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B

camouflaging of total receipts as commission and hence this argument of the assessee cannot be accepted. Penalty u/s. 270A are initiated for mis-reporting of income.” 6. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT (A). Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Sylns Agro Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the Revenue

ITA 403/HYD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No. Assessee Respondent A.Y 1 381/Hyd/2023 Acit Central Circle Bhoomika Agro 2020-21 2(2) Hyderabad Farms (P) Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 2 382/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 3 Co 7/Hyd/2023 Bhoomika Agro Acit Central Circle 2020-21 (Ita 381/H/23) Farms (P) Ltd 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 4 Co 8/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 382/H/23) 5 385/Hyd/2023 -Do- Sunshine Estate 2019-20 Construction India Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 6 386/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 7 387/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2022-22 8 Co3/Hyd/2023 Sunshine Estate Acit Central Circle 2019-20 (Ita 385/H/23) Construction India 2(2) Hyderabad Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 9 Co4/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 (Ita 386/H/23) 10 Co5/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 387/H/23) 11 388/Hyd/2023 -Do- Krishi Housing (P) 2017-18 Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B 12 389/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2018-19 13 390/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2019-20 14 391/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 15 392/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 16 Co9/Hyd/2023 Krishi Housing (P) Acit Central Circle 2017-18 (Ita 388/H/23) Ltd Hyderabad 2(2) Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B

camouflaging of total receipts as commission and hence this argument of the assessee cannot be accepted. Penalty u/s. 270A are initiated for mis-reporting of income.” 6. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT (A). Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Sylns Agro Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the Revenue

ITA 402/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No. Assessee Respondent A.Y 1 381/Hyd/2023 Acit Central Circle Bhoomika Agro 2020-21 2(2) Hyderabad Farms (P) Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 2 382/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 3 Co 7/Hyd/2023 Bhoomika Agro Acit Central Circle 2020-21 (Ita 381/H/23) Farms (P) Ltd 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 4 Co 8/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 382/H/23) 5 385/Hyd/2023 -Do- Sunshine Estate 2019-20 Construction India Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 6 386/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 7 387/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2022-22 8 Co3/Hyd/2023 Sunshine Estate Acit Central Circle 2019-20 (Ita 385/H/23) Construction India 2(2) Hyderabad Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 9 Co4/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 (Ita 386/H/23) 10 Co5/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 387/H/23) 11 388/Hyd/2023 -Do- Krishi Housing (P) 2017-18 Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B 12 389/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2018-19 13 390/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2019-20 14 391/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 15 392/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 16 Co9/Hyd/2023 Krishi Housing (P) Acit Central Circle 2017-18 (Ita 388/H/23) Ltd Hyderabad 2(2) Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B

camouflaging of total receipts as commission and hence this argument of the assessee cannot be accepted. Penalty u/s. 270A are initiated for mis-reporting of income.” 6. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT (A). Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Sylns Agro Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the Revenue

ITA 401/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No. Assessee Respondent A.Y 1 381/Hyd/2023 Acit Central Circle Bhoomika Agro 2020-21 2(2) Hyderabad Farms (P) Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 2 382/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 3 Co 7/Hyd/2023 Bhoomika Agro Acit Central Circle 2020-21 (Ita 381/H/23) Farms (P) Ltd 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 4 Co 8/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 382/H/23) 5 385/Hyd/2023 -Do- Sunshine Estate 2019-20 Construction India Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 6 386/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 7 387/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2022-22 8 Co3/Hyd/2023 Sunshine Estate Acit Central Circle 2019-20 (Ita 385/H/23) Construction India 2(2) Hyderabad Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 9 Co4/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 (Ita 386/H/23) 10 Co5/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 387/H/23) 11 388/Hyd/2023 -Do- Krishi Housing (P) 2017-18 Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B 12 389/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2018-19 13 390/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2019-20 14 391/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 15 392/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 16 Co9/Hyd/2023 Krishi Housing (P) Acit Central Circle 2017-18 (Ita 388/H/23) Ltd Hyderabad 2(2) Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B

camouflaging of total receipts as commission and hence this argument of the assessee cannot be accepted. Penalty u/s. 270A are initiated for mis-reporting of income.” 6. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT (A). Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Sylns Agro Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the Revenue

ITA 400/HYD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No. Assessee Respondent A.Y 1 381/Hyd/2023 Acit Central Circle Bhoomika Agro 2020-21 2(2) Hyderabad Farms (P) Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 2 382/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 3 Co 7/Hyd/2023 Bhoomika Agro Acit Central Circle 2020-21 (Ita 381/H/23) Farms (P) Ltd 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 4 Co 8/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 382/H/23) 5 385/Hyd/2023 -Do- Sunshine Estate 2019-20 Construction India Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 6 386/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 7 387/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2022-22 8 Co3/Hyd/2023 Sunshine Estate Acit Central Circle 2019-20 (Ita 385/H/23) Construction India 2(2) Hyderabad Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 9 Co4/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 (Ita 386/H/23) 10 Co5/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 387/H/23) 11 388/Hyd/2023 -Do- Krishi Housing (P) 2017-18 Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B 12 389/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2018-19 13 390/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2019-20 14 391/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 15 392/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 16 Co9/Hyd/2023 Krishi Housing (P) Acit Central Circle 2017-18 (Ita 388/H/23) Ltd Hyderabad 2(2) Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B

camouflaging of total receipts as commission and hence this argument of the assessee cannot be accepted. Penalty u/s. 270A are initiated for mis-reporting of income.” 6. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT (A). Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Krishna Reddy Gujjula, Nalgonda

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the Revenue

ITA 398/HYD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No. Assessee Respondent A.Y 1 381/Hyd/2023 Acit Central Circle Bhoomika Agro 2020-21 2(2) Hyderabad Farms (P) Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 2 382/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 3 Co 7/Hyd/2023 Bhoomika Agro Acit Central Circle 2020-21 (Ita 381/H/23) Farms (P) Ltd 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 4 Co 8/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 382/H/23) 5 385/Hyd/2023 -Do- Sunshine Estate 2019-20 Construction India Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 6 386/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 7 387/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2022-22 8 Co3/Hyd/2023 Sunshine Estate Acit Central Circle 2019-20 (Ita 385/H/23) Construction India 2(2) Hyderabad Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 9 Co4/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 (Ita 386/H/23) 10 Co5/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 387/H/23) 11 388/Hyd/2023 -Do- Krishi Housing (P) 2017-18 Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B 12 389/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2018-19 13 390/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2019-20 14 391/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 15 392/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 16 Co9/Hyd/2023 Krishi Housing (P) Acit Central Circle 2017-18 (Ita 388/H/23) Ltd Hyderabad 2(2) Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B

camouflaging of total receipts as commission and hence this argument of the assessee cannot be accepted. Penalty u/s. 270A are initiated for mis-reporting of income.” 6. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT (A). Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Krishi Housing Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the Revenue

ITA 392/HYD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No. Assessee Respondent A.Y 1 381/Hyd/2023 Acit Central Circle Bhoomika Agro 2020-21 2(2) Hyderabad Farms (P) Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 2 382/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 3 Co 7/Hyd/2023 Bhoomika Agro Acit Central Circle 2020-21 (Ita 381/H/23) Farms (P) Ltd 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 4 Co 8/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 382/H/23) 5 385/Hyd/2023 -Do- Sunshine Estate 2019-20 Construction India Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 6 386/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 7 387/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2022-22 8 Co3/Hyd/2023 Sunshine Estate Acit Central Circle 2019-20 (Ita 385/H/23) Construction India 2(2) Hyderabad Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 9 Co4/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 (Ita 386/H/23) 10 Co5/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 387/H/23) 11 388/Hyd/2023 -Do- Krishi Housing (P) 2017-18 Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B 12 389/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2018-19 13 390/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2019-20 14 391/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 15 392/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 16 Co9/Hyd/2023 Krishi Housing (P) Acit Central Circle 2017-18 (Ita 388/H/23) Ltd Hyderabad 2(2) Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B

camouflaging of total receipts as commission and hence this argument of the assessee cannot be accepted. Penalty u/s. 270A are initiated for mis-reporting of income.” 6. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT (A). Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Krishi Housing Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the Revenue

ITA 391/HYD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No. Assessee Respondent A.Y 1 381/Hyd/2023 Acit Central Circle Bhoomika Agro 2020-21 2(2) Hyderabad Farms (P) Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 2 382/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 3 Co 7/Hyd/2023 Bhoomika Agro Acit Central Circle 2020-21 (Ita 381/H/23) Farms (P) Ltd 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 4 Co 8/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 382/H/23) 5 385/Hyd/2023 -Do- Sunshine Estate 2019-20 Construction India Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 6 386/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 7 387/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2022-22 8 Co3/Hyd/2023 Sunshine Estate Acit Central Circle 2019-20 (Ita 385/H/23) Construction India 2(2) Hyderabad Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 9 Co4/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 (Ita 386/H/23) 10 Co5/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 387/H/23) 11 388/Hyd/2023 -Do- Krishi Housing (P) 2017-18 Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B 12 389/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2018-19 13 390/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2019-20 14 391/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 15 392/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 16 Co9/Hyd/2023 Krishi Housing (P) Acit Central Circle 2017-18 (Ita 388/H/23) Ltd Hyderabad 2(2) Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B

camouflaging of total receipts as commission and hence this argument of the assessee cannot be accepted. Penalty u/s. 270A are initiated for mis-reporting of income.” 6. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT (A). Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Krishi Housing Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the Revenue

ITA 390/HYD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No. Assessee Respondent A.Y 1 381/Hyd/2023 Acit Central Circle Bhoomika Agro 2020-21 2(2) Hyderabad Farms (P) Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 2 382/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 3 Co 7/Hyd/2023 Bhoomika Agro Acit Central Circle 2020-21 (Ita 381/H/23) Farms (P) Ltd 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 4 Co 8/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 382/H/23) 5 385/Hyd/2023 -Do- Sunshine Estate 2019-20 Construction India Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 6 386/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 7 387/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2022-22 8 Co3/Hyd/2023 Sunshine Estate Acit Central Circle 2019-20 (Ita 385/H/23) Construction India 2(2) Hyderabad Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 9 Co4/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 (Ita 386/H/23) 10 Co5/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 387/H/23) 11 388/Hyd/2023 -Do- Krishi Housing (P) 2017-18 Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B 12 389/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2018-19 13 390/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2019-20 14 391/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 15 392/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 16 Co9/Hyd/2023 Krishi Housing (P) Acit Central Circle 2017-18 (Ita 388/H/23) Ltd Hyderabad 2(2) Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B

camouflaging of total receipts as commission and hence this argument of the assessee cannot be accepted. Penalty u/s. 270A are initiated for mis-reporting of income.” 6. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT (A). Before the learned CIT (A), the assessee