“revised return”

Weld Fuse Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.277/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S. Weld Fuse Pvt. Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle 8(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan:Aaacw2119H (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 20/08/2025

after claiming deduction under section 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) of Rs.2,02,73,914/-. The assessee thereafter filed a revised return on 28.07.2018, admitting a total income of Rs.1,30,68,890/- after claiming the same deduction of Rs.2,02,73,914/- under section 80IA

Suresh Kumar Reddy Krishnapuram, Kurnool vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

entries of the group for 5 assessment years. Notice u/s 148 was issued on 19.01.2023, in response to which a revised return was filed on 14.02.2023, declaring Rs.12,72,16,160/-. Notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued with a detailed questionnaire and responses were submitted

Skandhanshi Infra Projects, Kurnool vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

entries of the group for 5 assessment years. Notice u/s 148 were issued on 19.01.2023, in response to which a revised return was filed on 14.02.2023, declaring Rs.12,72,16,160/-. Notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued with a detailed questionnaire and responses were submitted ... transactions, suppressed turnover, and undisclosed income. Importantly, these admissions were not conditional but were direct acknowledgments of income irregularities. ii) Subsequently, the appellant filed revised returns reflecting the additional income disclosed during the search. This corroborates the AO's assertion that the disclosure was not entirely voluntary but was compelled

Skanda Builders, Kurnool vs. ACIT., Central Circle - 2(3), Hyderabad

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

entries of the group for 5 assessment years. Notice u/s 148 were issued on 19.01.2023, in response to which a revised return was filed on 14.02.2023, declaring Rs.12,72,16,160/-. Notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued with a detailed questionnaire and responses were submitted ... transactions, suppressed turnover, and undisclosed income. Importantly, these admissions were not conditional but were direct acknowledgements of income irregularities. ii) Subsequently, the appellant filed revised returns reflecting the additional income disclosed during the search. This corroborates the AO’s assertion that the disclosure was not entirely voluntary but was compelled

Skanda Builders, Kurnool vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

entries of the group for 5 assessment years. Notice u/s 148 was issued on 19.01.2023, in response to which a revised return was filed on 14.02.2023, declaring Rs.12,72,16,160/-. Notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued with a detailed questionnaire and responses were submitted

Skandhanshi Developers, Kurnool vs. ACIT., Central Circle - 2(3), Hyderabad

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

entries of the group for 5 assessment years. Notice u/s 148 was issued on 19.01.2023, in response to which a revised return was filed on 14.02.2023, declaring Rs.12,72,16,160/-. Notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued with a detailed questionnaire and responses were submitted

Skandhanshi Infra Projects India Private Limited, Kurnool vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

transactions, suppressed turnover, and undisclosed income. Importantly, these admissions were not conditional but were direct acknowledgements of income irregularities. ii) Subsequently, the appellant filed revised returns reflecting the additional income disclosed during the search. This corroborates the AO's assertion that the disclosure was not entirely voluntary but was compelled

Skandhanshi Infra Projects India Private Limited, Kurnool vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

entries of the group for 5 assessment years. Notice u/s 148 was issued on 19.01.2023, in response to which a revised return was filed on 14.02.2023, declaring Rs.12,72,16,160/-. Notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued with a detailed questionnaire and responses were submitted ... transactions, suppressed turnover, and undisclosed income. Importantly, these admissions were not conditional but were direct acknowledgments of income irregularities. ii) Subsequently, the appellant filed revised returns reflecting the additional income disclosed during the search. This corroborates the AO's assertion that the disclosure was not entirely voluntary but was compelled

Skanda Infra Projects India Private Limited, Kurnool vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

transactions, suppressed turnover, and undisclosed income. Importantly, these admissions were not conditional but were direct acknowledgements of income irregularities. ii) Subsequently, the appellant filed revised returns reflecting the additional income disclosed during the search. This corroborates the AO's assertion that the disclosure was not entirely voluntary but was compelled ... entries of the group for 5 assessment years. Notice u/s 148 were issued on 19.01.2023, in response to which a revised return was filed on 14.02.2023, declaring Rs.12,72,16,160/-. Notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued with a detailed questionnaire and responses were submitted

ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad vs. Skandhanshi Infra Projects India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

entries of the group for 5 assessment years. Notice u/s 148 were issued on 19.01.2023, in response to which a revised return was filed on 14.02.2023, declaring Rs.12,72,16,160/-. Notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued with a detailed questionnaire and responses were submitted ... transactions, suppressed turnover, and undisclosed income. Importantly, these admissions were not conditional but were direct acknowledgments of income irregularities. ii) Subsequently, the appellant filed revised returns reflecting the additional income disclosed during the search. This corroborates the AO’s assertion that the disclosure was not entirely voluntary but was compelled

Vijetha Donthiri, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1355/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2019-20) Vijetha Donthiri, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Hyderabad. Tax, Central Circle 2(4), Pan:Alqpd4873P Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/ 05/08/2025 Date Of Hearing: घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 20/08/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Vijetha Donthiri (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 29.11.2024 For The A.Y. 2019-20. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

return of income for the assessment year 2019-20 on 01.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.28,420/-. Later on, the assessee filed a revised return on 31.12.2019 admitting total income of Rs.63,420/-. A search was conducted ITA No.1355/Hyd/2024 3 on a third party i.e. M/s. MSN Laboratories