ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PVT. LTD., BANGALORE

undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part of expenses\nnot actually attributable for the purpose of business activity\nwhich required to be disallowed u/sec.37(1) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 and claim of expenses paid to Commission\nAgents for marketing sale of flats are appears to be high and\nnot subjected to TDS

SKANDA INFRA PROJECTS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part of expenses\nnot actually attributable for the purpose of business activity\nwhich required to be disallowed u/sec.37(1) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 and claim of expenses paid to Commission\nAgents for marketing sale of flats are appears to be high and\nnot subjected to TDS

SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part of expenses\nnot actually attributable for the purpose of business activity\nwhich required to be disallowed u/sec.37(1) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 and claim of expenses paid to Commission\nAgents for marketing sale of flats are appears to be high and\nnot subjected to TDS

SKANDHANSHI DEVELOPERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

undisclosed turnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part of expenses not actually attributable for the purpose of business activity which required to be disallowed u/sec.37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and claim of expenses paid to Commission Agents for marketing sale of flats are appears to be high and not subjected to TDS

SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part of expenses\nnot actually attributable for the purpose of business activity\nwhich required to be disallowed u/sec.37(1) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 and claim of expenses paid to Commission\nAgents for marketing sale of flats are appears to be high and\nnot subjected to TDS

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PVT. LTD., BANGALORE

undisclosed turnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part of expenses not actually attributable for the purpose of business activity which required to be disallowed u/sec.37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and claim of expenses paid to Commission Agents for marketing sale of flats are appears to be high and not subjected to TDS

SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part of expenses\nnot actually attributable for the purpose of business activity\nwhich required to be disallowed u/sec.37(1) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 and claim of expenses paid to Commission\nAgents for marketing sale of flats are appears to be high and\nnot subjected to TDS

SKANDA INFRA PROJECTS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part of expenses\nnot actually attributable for the purpose of business activity\nwhich required to be disallowed u/sec.37(1) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 and claim of expenses paid to Commission\nAgents for marketing sale of flats are appears to be high and\nnot subjected to TDS

SKANDA BUILDERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), HYDERABAD

undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part of expenses\nnot actually attributable for the purpose of business activity\nwhich required to be disallowed u/sec.37(1) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 and claim of expenses paid to Commission\nAgents for marketing sale of flats are appears to be high and\nnot subjected to TDS

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

undisclosed income is not a requirement. A perusal of the facts of the case of the appellant would show that there is no proper satisfaction at Expressway Services Pvt. Ltd. the threshold level and hence the foundational requirement is wanting. The Court never specifically pronounced that satisfaction note, or the requirement of a common satisfaction note. It is a fundamental

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

undisclosed income is not a requirement. A perusal of the facts of the case of the appellant would show that there is no proper satisfaction at Expressway Services Pvt. Ltd. the threshold level and hence the foundational requirement is wanting. The Court never specifically pronounced that satisfaction note, or the requirement of a common satisfaction note. It is a fundamental

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

undisclosed income is not a requirement. A perusal of the facts of the case of the appellant would show that there is no proper satisfaction at Expressway Services Pvt. Ltd. the threshold level and hence the foundational requirement is wanting. The Court never specifically pronounced that satisfaction note, or the requirement of a common satisfaction note. It is a fundamental

SKANDA INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part of expenses\nnot actually attributable for the purpose of business activity\nwhich required to be disallowed u/sec.37(1) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 and claim of expenses paid to Commission\nAgents for marketing sale of flats are appears to be high and\nnot subjected to TDS

SKANDA INFRA PROJECTS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), HYDERABAD

undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part of expenses\nnot actually attributable for the purpose of business activity\nwhich required to be disallowed u/sec.37(1) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 and claim of expenses paid to Commission\nAgents for marketing sale of flats are appears to be high and\nnot subjected to TDS

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.

undisclosed income as quantified by the ADIT as well as the Additional income admitted by the assessee in the year-wise chart. Based on the amounts as given in said table/chart, the Assessing Officer treated the income escaped assessment in the case of the assessee for the A.Y 2014-15 to 2018-19 amounting to Rs.50 lakhs or more. During

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,K.V.RANGAREDDY vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.

undisclosed income as quantified by the ADIT as well as the Additional income admitted by the assessee in the year-wise chart. Based on the amounts as given in said table/chart, the Assessing Officer treated the income escaped assessment in the case of the assessee for the A.Y 2014-15 to 2018-19 amounting to Rs.50 lakhs or more. During

SURESH KUMAR REDDY KRISHNAPURAM,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

undisclosed turnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part of expenses not actually attributable for the purpose of business activity which required to be disallowed u/sec.37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and claim of expenses paid to Commission Agents for marketing sale of flats are appears to be high and not subjected to TDS

SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part of expenses\nnot actually attributable for the purpose of business activity\nwhich required to be disallowed u/sec.37(1) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 and claim of expenses paid to Commission\nAgents for marketing sale of flats are appears to be high and\nnot subjected to TDS