SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

section 50C of the IT Act for the purpose of computation of capital gains. In this regard, the AO placed relevant extract of information received, in his assessment order, which is reproduced above in para 4 of this order. From the relevant extract of the information, the AO worked out the suppression of sale consideration for the year under consideration

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

section 50C of the IT Act for the purpose of computation of capital gains. In this regard, the AO placed relevant extract of information received, in his assessment order, which is reproduced above in para 4 of this order. From the relevant extract of the information, the AO worked out the suppression of sale consideration for the year under consideration

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

section 50C of the IT Act for the purpose of computation of capital gains. In this regard, the AO placed relevant extract of information received, in his assessment order, which is reproduced above in para 4 of this order. From the relevant extract of the information, the AO worked out the suppression of sale consideration for the year under consideration

ITO, WARD-7(3), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. KOSETTY KISHORE, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

section 2(47)(v) of the Act in the AY 2009-10. Therefore, AO cannot tax the capital gains in AY 2009-10. Accordingly, ground raised by the revenue in this regard, is dismissed. 8.7 With regard to assessee’s appeal, we allow ground No. 9, and all other grounds raised by assessee are not considered at this stage

K GOPAL RAJ, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CEN.CIRCLE-1(3), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

section 2(47)(v) of the Act in the AY 2009-10. Therefore, AO cannot tax the capital gains in AY 2009-10. Accordingly, ground raised by the revenue in this regard, is dismissed. 8.7 With regard to assessee’s appeal, we allow ground No. 9, and all other grounds raised by assessee are not considered at this stage

ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. K GOPAL RAJ, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

section 2(47)(v) of the Act in the AY 2009-10. Therefore, AO cannot tax the capital gains in AY 2009-10. Accordingly, ground raised by the revenue in this regard, is dismissed. 8.7 With regard to assessee’s appeal, we allow ground No. 9, and all other grounds raised by assessee are not considered at this stage

ITO, WARD-7(3), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. KOSETTY NAGARAJU, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

section 2(47)(v) of the Act in the AY 2009-10. Therefore, AO cannot tax the capital gains in AY 2009-10. Accordingly, ground raised by the revenue in this regard, is dismissed. 8.7 With regard to assessee’s appeal, we allow ground No. 9, and all other grounds raised by assessee are not considered at this stage

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

1 Name of the Group Searched 2 Name and PAN of the person referred to in section 153A 3 Date of initiation of search in the case of the person referred to in section 153A 4 Name, address, and PAN of the person in whose case action under section 153C is proposed 5 Specific details of seized material

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

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

sections of the Act under any five heads of income. 15. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in initiating the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) against concealment of income without appreciating the facts. 16. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act basing on the income determined in the assessment proceedings

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

sections of the Act under any five heads of income. 15. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in initiating the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) against concealment of income without appreciating the facts. 16. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act basing on the income determined in the assessment proceedings

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

sections of the Act under any five heads of income. 15. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in initiating the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) against concealment of income without appreciating the facts. 16. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act basing on the income determined in the assessment proceedings

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

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

sections of the Act under any five heads of income. 15. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in initiating the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) against concealment of income without appreciating the facts. 16. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act basing on the income determined in the assessment proceedings

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

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

sections of the Act under any five heads of income. 15. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in initiating the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) against concealment of income without appreciating the facts. 16. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act basing on the income determined in the assessment proceedings

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

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

sections of the Act under any five heads of income. 15. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in initiating the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) against concealment of income without appreciating the facts. 16. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act basing on the income determined in the assessment proceedings

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 :

Capital Gains by the Ld. AO is based solely on the statement of the assessee’s husband, which is a third-party statement. No corroborative seized evidence supports this assertion. In this regards, we have gone through para no. 38 of the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India

C VAMSI KRISHNA ,HYDERABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 C.Vamsi Krishna V Dcit,Cc-2 Flat No.-401 S. Aaykar Bhawan Rohiwal Windsor Basheerbagh Apartment, Hill Fort Road Hyderabad-500 04 Saifabad Hyderabad-500 004

Capital Gain: Rs. 1,01,05,000/- 4. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Appellant received a sale consideration of only Rs.42,24,000/ - in respect of his property in question. The alleged receipt of Rs.1,08,08,000/ - is only a guess work for which there is no evidence. 5. Further, the learned CIT(A) failed

ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (INTL.TXN)-II,, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE (P) LIMITED,, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the assessee’s appeal for the A.Y. 2009-10 is dismissed as withdrawn”

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

153C of the I.T. Act. Therefore, it is clear that the provisions of section 153B are not applicable. As per sub-section (3) of section 149, the assessment under section 148 on the ‘representative-assessee’ shall not be made after expiry of a period of two years from the end of the relevant assessment year. In the case before

ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (INTL.TXN)-II,, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE (P) LIMITED,, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the assessee’s appeal for the A.Y. 2009-10 is dismissed as withdrawn”

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

153C of the I.T. Act. Therefore, it is clear that the provisions of section 153B are not applicable. As per sub-section (3) of section 149, the assessment under section 148 on the ‘representative-assessee’ shall not be made after expiry of a period of two years from the end of the relevant assessment year. In the case before