VILAS POLYMER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the six appeals i

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1870 To 1875/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2014-2015 To 2019-2020 Vilas Polymer Private The Dcit, Limited, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(2), Vs. Pin – 500 090 Hyderabad – 500 004. Pan Aaacv9854A Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca M V Prasad राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18.02.2026 आदेश/Order

26. One more contention and point raised by the learned Counsel for the assessee is that the seized material was found from the possession of Shri Ramesh Kumar Sanaka in a separate search & seizure action and therefore, the case of the assessee does not fall in the first proviso to section 148A of the I.T. Act. We have already reproduced

VILAS POLYMER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the six appeals i

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1870 To 1875/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2014-2015 To 2019-2020 Vilas Polymer Private The Dcit, Limited, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(2), Vs. Pin – 500 090 Hyderabad – 500 004. Pan Aaacv9854A Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca M V Prasad राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18.02.2026 आदेश/Order

26. One more contention and point raised by the learned Counsel for the assessee is that the seized material was found from the possession of Shri Ramesh Kumar Sanaka in a separate search & seizure action and therefore, the case of the assessee does not fall in the first proviso to section 148A of the I.T. Act. We have already reproduced

VILAS POLYMER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the six appeals i

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1870 To 1875/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2014-2015 To 2019-2020 Vilas Polymer Private The Dcit, Limited, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(2), Vs. Pin – 500 090 Hyderabad – 500 004. Pan Aaacv9854A Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca M V Prasad राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18.02.2026 आदेश/Order

26. One more contention and point raised by the learned Counsel for the assessee is that the seized material was found from the possession of Shri Ramesh Kumar Sanaka in a separate search & seizure action and therefore, the case of the assessee does not fall in the first proviso to section 148A of the I.T. Act. We have already reproduced

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1894/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Exel Rubber (P) Ltd Vs. Dy.Cit Hyderabad Central Circle 1(2) Pan:Aaace4495J Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 20/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11 Hyderabad, Dated 11/10/2025 For The A.Y 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

26. One more contention and point raised by the learned Counsel for the assessee is that the seized material was found from the possession of Shri Ramesh Kumar Sanaka in a separate search & seizure action and therefore, the case of the assessee does not fall in the first proviso to section 148A of the I.T. Act. We have already reproduced

DY.CIT, CIR-1(2), HYDERABAD vs. M/S CUNTRY CLUB (I) LIMITED,, HYDERABAD

In the result, the grounds of the appeal of the assessee on this issue are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Country Club Vs. Asst. Cit, Circle-1(2), Hospitality & Holidays Ltd., Hyderabad. (Formerly Known As Country Club India Ltd.,) Hyderabad.

purchase of items such as vegetables, fruits, dairy, poultry, milk and other sundry expenses from the small vendors who do not have any bank account and hence could not be paid in cheques / through banking channel. Hence, disallowance u/s. 40A(3) is not called for. 4. That the assessee company is running hotel business and the company is having

M/S. COUNTRY CLUB INDIA LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the grounds of the appeal of the assessee on this issue are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Country Club Vs. Asst. Cit, Circle-1(2), Hospitality & Holidays Ltd., Hyderabad. (Formerly Known As Country Club India Ltd.,) Hyderabad.

purchase of items such as vegetables, fruits, dairy, poultry, milk and other sundry expenses from the small vendors who do not have any bank account and hence could not be paid in cheques / through banking channel. Hence, disallowance u/s. 40A(3) is not called for. 4. That the assessee company is running hotel business and the company is having

KIRAN BALA GUPTA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.341/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Kiran Bala Gupta, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward-10(1), Pan: Ahvpg6893K Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Av Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Ms. Aditi Goyal, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 20/02/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 20/12/2024, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 30/08/2022 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order Of The Cit(A) On The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

iii) rejection of the assessee’s claim for exemption of the capital gain on sale of shares, i.e., 57,200 shares of Oasis Cine Communication Ltd and addition of the entire sale proceeds to the income of the assessee: Rs.1,86,32,023/-; and (iv) addition of the 4 Smt. Kiran Bala Gupta vs. ITO amounts claimed by the assessee

ISHOO NARANG,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.450/Hyd/2022 & S.A. No.1/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ishoo Narang Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 2(1) Pan:Aaupn9082B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Th Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15/07/2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Al The Mandatory Preconditions Before Reopening Of Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act Were Duly Complied & Met With By The A.O.

iii) That such schemes are prevalent for converting black money into white is common knowledge, independently confirmed by SEBI. iv) The assessee is one such beneficiary who has taken entry of LTCG amounting to Rs. Rs.6,45,76,466. v) Also, similar entries have been taken by one of the directors of M/s. Kyori Oremin Ltd total amounting to Rs.2.3

BASANTH LAL SAH,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us :

Section 133(6) of the Act could not have been pressed into service by the authorities below for doubting the authenticity of the purchase transactions. Elaborating further on his contention, the Ld. AR submitted that now when the assessee, to discharge the primary onus that was cast upon him for proving the identity of the subject purchases, had placed

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

26. The learned counsel for the assessee, referring to the written submissions, submitted that the entire addition has been made on the basis of notings retrieved from the personal email account of Shri P. Anil Kumar, who was independently engaged in contract business and whose email cannot be treated as belonging to the assessee. It was further submitted that

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

26. The learned counsel for the assessee, referring to the written submissions, submitted that the entire addition has been made on the basis of notings retrieved from the personal email account of Shri P. Anil Kumar, who was independently engaged in contract business and whose email cannot be treated as belonging to the assessee. It was further submitted that

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

26. The learned counsel for the assessee, referring to the written submissions, submitted that the entire addition has been made on the basis of notings retrieved from the personal email account of Shri P. Anil Kumar, who was independently engaged in contract business and whose email cannot be treated as belonging to the assessee. It was further submitted that

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

26. The learned counsel for the assessee, referring to the written submissions, submitted that the entire addition has been made on the basis of notings retrieved from the personal email account of Shri P. Anil Kumar, who was independently engaged in contract business and whose email cannot be treated as belonging to the assessee. It was further submitted that

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

26. The learned counsel for the assessee, referring to the written submissions, submitted that the entire addition has been made on the basis of notings retrieved from the personal email account of Shri P. Anil Kumar, who was independently engaged in contract business and whose email cannot be treated as belonging to the assessee. It was further submitted that

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

26. The learned counsel for the assessee, referring to the written submissions, submitted that the entire addition has been made on the basis of notings retrieved from the personal email account of Shri P. Anil Kumar, who was independently engaged in contract business and whose email cannot be treated as belonging to the assessee. It was further submitted that

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

26. The learned counsel for the assessee, referring to the written submissions, submitted that the entire addition has been made on the basis of notings retrieved from the personal email account of Shri P. Anil Kumar, who was independently engaged in contract business and whose email cannot be treated as belonging to the assessee. It was further submitted that

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

26. The learned counsel for the assessee, referring to the written submissions, submitted that the entire addition has been made on the basis of notings retrieved from the personal email account of Shri P. Anil Kumar, who was independently engaged in contract business and whose email cannot be treated as belonging to the assessee. It was further submitted that

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

26. The learned counsel for the assessee, referring to the written submissions, submitted that the entire addition has been made on the basis of notings retrieved from the personal email account of Shri P. Anil Kumar, who was independently engaged in contract business and whose email cannot be treated as belonging to the assessee. It was further submitted that

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

26. The learned counsel for the assessee, referring to the written submissions, submitted that the entire addition has been made on the basis of notings retrieved from the personal email account of Shri P. Anil Kumar, who was independently engaged in contract business and whose email cannot be treated as belonging to the assessee. It was further submitted that