RAMACHANDRAN BANDHUVULA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Ramachandran Vs. Income Tax Officer Bandhuvula, Hyderabad Ward 3(1) Pan:Aczpb3228M Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Advocate Smt. S. Sandhya Revenue By: Shri Kprr Murthy, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 17/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/04/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.08.2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) 15 Erroneous To The Extent It Is Prejudicial To The Appellant. 2. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Erred In Levy Of Penalty U/S 271D Of The I.T Act. Without Giving Proper Opportunity. 3. The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Ought To Have Observed That The Transaction Of Sale Doesn'T Fall During The Previous Year Relevant For Assessment Year Under Consideration As The Registration Took Place On. 20.01.2016 Relevant For The Assessment Year 2016-17. Page 1 Of 8

Capital gain 5. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) ought to have considered that the appellant was out of India from 08-06-16 to 05-12 2016 and ought to have considered that the submissions made by the appellant. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 3. Facts of the case

JAYARAM BASANI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-15(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

demonetization he, had-deposited the same in his bank accounts. The assessee has further submitted that the amount of cash received by him is not a loan or deposit but sale consideration and on receipt of such sale consideration in cash, section 269SS is not applicable. The assessee has further submitted that the capital gains

SLV ELECTRONICS,KURNOOL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-I, KURNOOL, KURNOOL

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Slv Electronics, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Kurnool, Ward – 1, Kurnool. D.No.76-97-174-5, Weeker Section Colony, Kallur, Andhra Pradesh – 518003. Pan : Addfs6605B. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Niharika, Advocate Appeared For Shri Shaik Jeelani Basha, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri Srikanth, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing: 21/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/09/2023

capital gains. 8. The Appellant Prays the Honourable Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to quash the orders of the Honourable Commissioner, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. As the first Appellate Authority has not given an opportunity to prove the same.” 2 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that assessee being the firm has not filed its Return of Income

KRISHNA CONSTRUCTIONS,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.No.1330/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Krishna Constructions The Income Tax Officer, Nirmal. Telangana. Ward-1, Vs. Pin – 504 106. Nirmal – 504 106. Pan Aapfk1280K Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By : Sri D Prabhakar Reddy, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Dr. Sachin Kumar,Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 08.04.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

demonetization period and not on the issue of examination of all the credits made in the bank accounts of the assessee. iv. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Learned Assessing Officer ("AO") erred in expanding the scope of "limited scrutiny" of the assessee beyond the examination of "cash deposits", covering additional issues

SPANDANA SPHOORTY FINANCIAL LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE 3(2), HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the addition of Rs.11,44,51,818/- (supra) made by the\nAO, which, thereafter, had been sustained by the CIT(A), is vacated.\nThe Grounds of appeal Nos.3.1 to 3.4 are allowed in terms o...

capital gains arising in India\non sale of shares as per paragraph 4 of Article 13. This, the High Court\nthought amounts to issuing instructions \"de hors the provisions of the Act\".\nIn our view, this thinking of the High Court is erroneous.”\nAlso, support is drawn from the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court\nof Chattisgarh

ASHU KUMAR JAIN,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-10(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.743/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Ashu Kumar Jain Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 10(3) Pan:Acjpj9269R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Kumar Patel Tated, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri K.N. Suresh Babu, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 29/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 02/09/2024 आदेश/Order

capital gain income of Rs.2,33,580/-. Later the case was converted into Page 1 of 4 ITA No 743 of 2024 Ashu Kumar Jain scrutiny as per CASS provisions which specifies to examine the following: “Large value cash deposits during demonetization

MAHESH KUMAR SUKHJIKA KEDIA,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary

demonetization”. 4. Learned Assessing Officer PASSED THE ORDER dated 30/12/2019 under section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), without any adverse comments or addition in respect of the large investments in property or capital gains

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1) , HYDERABAD vs. SATYA SAYEE BABU DIVI , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

capital gains, income from other sources and agricultural income. It was stated that as per the cash balance details the assessee had an opening cash balance of Rs.8 lakhs and had withdrawn a total cash of Rs.1,24,89,549/- during the year. Out of these withdrawals, it was claimed that the assessee had deposited Rs.83 lakhs during demonetization

GOWRI SHANKAR GUPTA,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), HYDERABAD

demonetization period had made cash deposits of Rs.35.13 lacs in his bank account No.118001000030501 with Indian Overseas Bank. It was further observed by him that the aforesaid bank 5 Gowri Shankar Gupta account held by the assessee with Indian Overseas Bank was not disclosed by him in the return of income. As the assessee had failed to come forth with

RANJAN GOUD ANGULURI,NIZAMABAD vs. ITO., WARD-1, NIZAMABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary

capital gains and held about Rs. 30 lakhs in his hands as on 08/11/2016, there is no enquiry on this aspect. So also, learned CIT(A) rejected all the evidence that was produced by the assessee because according to him, some bills belong to earlier years and names of some other persons were to be found on some bills

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ROYAL ENGINEERING, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

Capital Gain Tax) of Rs. 93,69,810/- Tax on normal rate on income Total Tax there on = 93,69,810/- Less : Rebate on Agri. Income = 0 Page 7 of 31 Add surcharge @ 0% 0 Total Tax (Tax+Surcharge) 93,69,810/- Add: Education cess @ 3% = 2,81,094/- 96,50,904/- Tax on total Income = Add: Interest u/s 234A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ROYAL ENGINEERING, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

Capital Gain Tax) of Rs. 93,69,810/- Tax on normal rate on income Total Tax there on = 93,69,810/- Less : Rebate on Agri. Income = 0 Page 7 of 31 Add surcharge @ 0% 0 Total Tax (Tax+Surcharge) 93,69,810/- Add: Education cess @ 3% = 2,81,094/- 96,50,904/- Tax on total Income = Add: Interest u/s 234A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ROYAL ENGINEERING, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

Capital Gain Tax) of Rs. 93,69,810/- Tax on normal rate on income Total Tax there on = 93,69,810/- Less : Rebate on Agri. Income = 0 Page 7 of 31 Add surcharge @ 0% 0 Total Tax (Tax+Surcharge) 93,69,810/- Add: Education cess @ 3% = 2,81,094/- 96,50,904/- Tax on total Income = Add: Interest u/s 234A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ROYAL ENGINEERING, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

Capital Gain Tax) of Rs. 93,69,810/- Tax on normal rate on income Total Tax there on = 93,69,810/- Less : Rebate on Agri. Income = 0 Page 7 of 31 Add surcharge @ 0% 0 Total Tax (Tax+Surcharge) 93,69,810/- Add: Education cess @ 3% = 2,81,094/- 96,50,904/- Tax on total Income = Add: Interest u/s 234A

ACE CONSTRUCTIONS,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

Capital Gain Tax) of Rs. 93,69,810/- Tax on normal rate on income Total Tax there on = 93,69,810/- Less : Rebate on Agri. Income = 0 Page 7 of 31 Add surcharge @ 0% 0 Total Tax (Tax+Surcharge) 93,69,810/- Add: Education cess @ 3% = 2,81,094/- 96,50,904/- Tax on total Income = Add: Interest u/s 234A

ACE CONSTRUCTIONS,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

Capital Gain Tax) of Rs. 93,69,810/- Tax on normal rate on income Total Tax there on = 93,69,810/- Less : Rebate on Agri. Income = 0 Page 7 of 31 Add surcharge @ 0% 0 Total Tax (Tax+Surcharge) 93,69,810/- Add: Education cess @ 3% = 2,81,094/- 96,50,904/- Tax on total Income = Add: Interest u/s 234A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ACE CONSTRUCTIONS, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

Capital Gain Tax) of Rs. 93,69,810/- Tax on normal rate on income Total Tax there on = 93,69,810/- Less : Rebate on Agri. Income = 0 Page 7 of 31 Add surcharge @ 0% 0 Total Tax (Tax+Surcharge) 93,69,810/- Add: Education cess @ 3% = 2,81,094/- 96,50,904/- Tax on total Income = Add: Interest u/s 234A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ACE CONSTRUCTIONS, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

Capital Gain Tax) of Rs. 93,69,810/- Tax on normal rate on income Total Tax there on = 93,69,810/- Less : Rebate on Agri. Income = 0 Page 7 of 31 Add surcharge @ 0% 0 Total Tax (Tax+Surcharge) 93,69,810/- Add: Education cess @ 3% = 2,81,094/- 96,50,904/- Tax on total Income = Add: Interest u/s 234A

ROYAL ENGINEERING,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

Capital Gain Tax) of Rs. 93,69,810/- Tax on normal rate on income Total Tax there on = 93,69,810/- Less : Rebate on Agri. Income = 0 Page 7 of 31 Add surcharge @ 0% 0 Total Tax (Tax+Surcharge) 93,69,810/- Add: Education cess @ 3% = 2,81,094/- 96,50,904/- Tax on total Income = Add: Interest u/s 234A