SARAT GOPAL BOPPANA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

gain arising from application of capital asset into stock-in-trade. Whereas, in cases, where the stock-in-trade converted into or treated as capital asset, the existing law does not provide for its taxability. In order to provide simple treatment and describe the practice of difference payment of tax by converting into the inventory into fixed assets, provisions

SARAT GOPAL BOPPANA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3),, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

gain arising from application of capital asset into stock-in-trade. Whereas, in cases, where the stock-in-trade converted into or treated as capital asset, the existing law does not provide for its taxability. In order to provide simple treatment and describe the practice of difference payment of tax by converting into the inventory into fixed assets, provisions

TARA CHAND BOPPANA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

gain arising from application of capital asset into stock-in-trade. Whereas, in cases, where the stock-in-trade converted into or treated as capital asset, the existing law does not provide for its taxability. In order to provide simple treatment and describe the practice of difference payment of tax by converting into the inventory into fixed assets, provisions

KAVYA BOPPANA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

gain arising from application of capital asset into stock-in-trade. Whereas, in cases, where the stock-in-trade converted into or treated as capital asset, the existing law does not provide for its taxability. In order to provide simple treatment and describe the practice of difference payment of tax by converting into the inventory into fixed assets, provisions

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. SARAT GOPAL BOPPANA, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

gain arising from application of capital asset into stock-in-trade. Whereas, in cases, where the stock-in-trade converted into or treated as capital asset, the existing law does not provide for its taxability. In order to provide simple treatment and describe the practice of difference payment of tax by converting into the inventory into fixed assets, provisions

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. TARA CHAND BOPPANA, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

gain arising from application of capital asset into stock-in-trade. Whereas, in cases, where the stock-in-trade converted into or treated as capital asset, the existing law does not provide for its taxability. In order to provide simple treatment and describe the practice of difference payment of tax by converting into the inventory into fixed assets, provisions

NIMMATOORI YASHODA,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

gain, she was under the bonafide belief that, provisions of Sec.269SS of the Act would not apply. The Jt./Addl. CIT, Central Range-2, Hyderabad after considering 22 ITA.Nos.602 & 603/Hyd./2025 relevant submissions of assessee and also by following judicial precedents including the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of P. Bhaskar

NIMMATOORI SULOCHANA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

gain, she was under the bonafide belief that, provisions of Sec.269SS of the Act would not apply. The Jt./Addl. CIT, Central Range-2, Hyderabad after considering 22 ITA.Nos.602 & 603/Hyd./2025 relevant submissions of assessee and also by following judicial precedents including the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of P. Bhaskar

TAURUS VALUE STEEL & PIPES PVT LTD,RANGA REDDY vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

ab-initio as the appellant was not given further opportunity of being heard before passing an order and as such the order passed is against the principles of Natural Justice. iii.The Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department has erred in assessing Long Term Capital Gain from sale of Factory Land and Building at Rs.42,03,53,365/- in place

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCL GREEN HABITATS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

gains of business or profession" or under the head "Salaries";] 33[(v) where any sum of money exceeding twenty-five thousand rupees is received without consideration by an individual or a Hindu undivided family from any person on or after the 1st day of September, 2004 34[but before the 1st day of April, 2006], the whole of such

SANJEEVA PRASAD PONNAPULA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(2), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

ab initio. j. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that by no stretch of imagination, the impugned registered documents based on which all1 the additions have been made u/s 50C of the Act, can be taken as the material seized in the search. k. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the entire information with regard

SANJEEVA PRASAD PONNAPULA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(2), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

ab initio. j. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that by no stretch of imagination, the impugned registered documents based on which all1 the additions have been made u/s 50C of the Act, can be taken as the material seized in the search. k. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the entire information with regard

SANJEEVA PRASAD PONNAPULA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(2), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

ab initio. j. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that by no stretch of imagination, the impugned registered documents based on which all1 the additions have been made u/s 50C of the Act, can be taken as the material seized in the search. k. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the entire information with regard

NIMMATOORI RAMESH BABU,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that, the assessee, an individual and is one of the Trustees of M/s. Aurora Educational Society & Other Group Trusts. The assessee has originally filed his return of income for the assessment year 2016-2017 on 14.03.2017 admitting total income of Rs.19,83,320/-, after claiming Chapter-VIA deductions of Rs.1

LATE NIMMATOORI RAJABABU L/R BY ANUDEEP NIMMATOORI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that, the assessee, an individual and is one of the Trustees of M/s. Aurora Educational Society & Other Group Trusts. The assessee has originally filed his return of income for the assessment year 2016-2017 on 14.03.2017 admitting total income of Rs.19,83,320/-, after claiming Chapter-VIA deductions of Rs.1

LATE NIMMATOORI RAJA BABU,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.Nos.596 & 597/Hyd

2)\nof Act.\n7. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the AO has not\nrecorded his satisfaction about initiation of penalty proceedings\nu/s 271D of the Act\n8. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that, as per the\nprovisions of section 271, a proper satisfaction must be recorded\nto initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271D instead

BRIJESH CHANDWANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE -6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2020-2021 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1527 & 1528/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years – 2016-2017 & 2020-2021 Brijesh Chandwani The Dcit, Circle-6(1), Vs. Hyderabad – 500 034 Hyderabad. Pan Adkpc1537H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Pawan Kumar Chakrapani राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Ar

capital gain, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. The Appellant denies himself liable to interest under section 234A, 2348 and 234C of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 11. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or substitute any of the grounds urged above. 4 ITA.No.1527 & 1528/Hyd./2025

BRIJESH CHANDWANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE -6(1), HYDERABAD

35,330/-, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 9. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in arriving at the unit loss of Rs. 1,53,71,792/-, and recalculating the short term capital gain, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. The Appellant denies himself liable to interest under section 234A, 2348 and 234C