BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

106 results for “depreciation”+ Cash Depositclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai899Delhi764Bangalore223Ahmedabad209Jaipur190Chennai159Kolkata153Chandigarh123Hyderabad106Raipur89Amritsar77Pune71Visakhapatnam70Cochin61Surat48Indore45Cuttack27Lucknow25Nagpur23Rajkot23Agra12Allahabad10Telangana8Guwahati8Ranchi7Jodhpur7SC7Karnataka6Patna5Jabalpur4Varanasi3Panaji3Dehradun2Calcutta2

Key Topics

Section 143(3)90Addition to Income77Section 14847Disallowance46Depreciation36Section 14732Deduction30Section 6829Section 148A28Section 14A

KISAN,NIZAMABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-1, NIZAMABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 652/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, SR-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)

depreciation of Rs.9,21,953/-. Accordingly, the ground no.2 of the assessee is allowed. 11. Ground no.3 of the assessee is related to addition of Rs.80,01,400/- u/s.69 of the Act. In this regard, the Ld. AR submitted that, during the demonetisation period i.e. from 10.11.2016 to 30.12.2016, the assessee had deposited cash

Showing 1–20 of 106 · Page 1 of 6

27
Section 4024
Section 143(2)24

GONUGUNTLA NIRMALA DEVI,ANANTAPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 455/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr.AR
Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 68

depreciation on Plant & Machinery claimed by the appellant. 8. That the Ld.CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.32,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer treating cash deposits

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NELLORE vs. VENKATA RAMANAMMA SAKAMURI, NELLORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue being devoid and bereft of any substance is dismissed

ITA 482/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Us:

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

cash deposits of 1.51 crore (Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank), 1.45 crore (Canara Bank), and TCS on liquor transactions of 1.74 crore. The assessee failed to file their return of income, justifying the AO’s belief of potential income escapement. However, it is seen from the record available in the system that the approval for re-opening of the case

VASUKI KATAKAM,KURNOOL vs. ITO., WARD-1, KURNOOL

ITA 1327/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.1327/Hyd/2025

For Appellant: CA Hari AgarwalFor Respondent: MS P Sumitha, Sr. AR
Section 139(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151ASection 64Section 69A

cash deposits and time deposit in bank accounts remains unexplained and consequently, the income in relation to the same has escaped assessment. Accordingly, it is required to be considered that the above information available with the Assessing Officer reveals that the income chargeable to tax represented in the form of asset which has escaped assessment amounts to more than fifty

BALGURI RAJESHWAR RAO,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 11(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ITA 1728/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.1728/Hyd/2025

For Appellant: T Chaitanya Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Helen Ruby Jesindha, Sr. AR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

cash deposits and time deposits, aggregating to Rs. 1,38,85,200/- is income chargeable to tax represented in the form of asset, which are likely to amount to Rs.50 lakhs and more, has escaped assessment in the hands of assessee for A.Y. 2016-17. In view of the above, it is a fit case to initiate proceedings

RAJENDER REDDY GUNNA ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal ITA

ITA 1849/HYD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Aug 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

deposits into bank accounts of employees without appreciating the submission that all of such receipts relate to the entries in the seized book for survey and plotting work done by the firm and were drawn and spent for such work by them and are considered in the firm's returns that are filed. 7. The learned CIT(A) erred

VK WAREHOUSING ENTERPRISES,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee firm and the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of our observations recorded hereinabove

ITA 737/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.737/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aakfv3288R (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.881/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Vs. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.A. राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri P. Dhivahar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234BSection 271(1)(b)Section 40Section 69Section 69CSection 801B

depreciation of INR 3,11,24,473 under section(u/s) 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) , without proper verification of the relevant records and supporting documents. 4. The Hon’ble CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of INR 25,85,800 made by the Ld.AO u/s 69 of the Act, by treating the cash deposits

ANANTHA PVC PIPES PRIVATE LIMITED,ANANTAPUR vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL

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

ITA 317/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.317/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S. Anantha Pvc Pipes Pvt. Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle-1, Kurnool. Anantapur. Pan:Aagca0936J (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri T. Rajendra Prasad, C.A. & Shri P. Rosi Reddy, Advocate. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 31/07/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 06/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By M/S. Anantha Pvc Pipes Pvt. Ltd. (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 25.07.2024 For The A.Y. 2017-18. 2. At The Outset, It Is Observed That There Is A Delay Of 147 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. In This Regard, The

For Appellant: Shri T. Rajendra Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR

depreciation was allowed, but the carry ITA No.317/Hyd/2025 6 forward of business loss was denied. Later on, the case was selected for scrutiny under section 143(3) of the Act for verification of cash deposits

ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD vs. VK WAREHOUSING ENTERPRISES, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee firm and

ITA 881/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234BSection 271(1)(b)Section 40Section 68Section 69Section 69CSection 801B

depreciation of INR 3,11,24,473 under section(u/s) 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) without proper verification of the relevant records and supporting documents. , 4. The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of INR 25,85,800 made by the Ld.AO u/s 69 of the Act, by treating the cash deposits

HIMABINDU,BANGALORE vs. ITO., WARD-1, CHITTOOR

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

ITA 799/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69Section 69A

cash deposit of Rs.10,77,608/- during demonetisation was in the ordinary course of business and fully explainable. Accordingly, he prayed that the additional evidence be admitted, and addition of Rs.36,96,420/- be deleted. ITA No.799/Hyd/2025 7 6. With regard to disallowance of expenditure (Rs.6,77,863/-), the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee incurred routine business expenses such

ACIT., CIRCLE-1(1), TIRUPATI vs. PONNAMBALAM KRISHNAN, CHITTOOR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 655/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G, Accountnat Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.655/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Shri Ponnambalam Krishnan, Tax, Circle 1(1), Tirupati. Vs. Ekjambarakuppam, Chittoor, A.P. Pan : Bedpk5641B (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.11/Hyd/2024 (Assessment Year:2017-18) (By Assessee) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri E. Phalguna Kumar, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala,Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of 10/09/2024 Hearing: घोर्णध की रीख/Pronouncement: 20/09/2024

For Appellant: Shri E. Phalguna Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala,SR-DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 40Section 68

deposited by the assessee in cash during the demonetisation period. c) Addition of Rs.20,67,263/- u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. d) Disallowance of depreciation

THE PRAKASAM DISTRISET POLICE WELFARE ASSOCIATION,ONGOLE vs. ITO., WARD-1, ONGOLE

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

ITA 1305/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2018-19
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69A

cash deposits of Rs.3,92,22,536/-, determined its income at Rs.4,33,93,686/-. 6. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but without success. 4 The Prakasam District Police Welfare Association vs. ITO 7. The assessee aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before

SUDHEER PARIMALA,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 758/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.758/Hyd./2025 Assessment Year 2015-2016 Sudheer Parimala, The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad – 500 016. Vs. Ward-10(1), Hyderabad. Pan Ahppp7572E Pin - 500 004. Telangana (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Ca Kranthi Palivela & Ca Mrudulatha For Revenue : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing : 24.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.04.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA Kranthi Palivela And CA MrudulathaFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 69A

deposits represent business receipts and not unexplained money;  Alternatively, direct the authorities to estimate income on a reasonable and just basis under the applicable provisions of law; 4 ITA.No.758/Hyd./2025  Quash the assessment framed u/s 147 rw.s. 144 as bad in law;  Drop the penalty proceedings initiated under sections 271(1)(c) and 271F;  And grant such other relief

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, WARANGAL vs. SHIVA KUMAR THOTA, WARANGAL

In the result, the primary objection filed by the assessee vide his letter, dated 02/06/2025 is allowed while for the appeal filed by

ITA 996/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.996/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shiva Kumar Thota, Ward-1, Warangal. Warangal. Pan: Aaopt4519M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 06/08/2024 Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 26/05/2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Revenue Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 43BSection 68

cash deposits aggregating to Rs.7,24,58,000/- (Rs.2,35,06,868/-, made during the demonetization 4 ITO vs. Shiva Kumar Thota period plus Rs.4,89,51,132/-, made during the post demonetization period); (ii) addition of unproved sundry creditors under section 68 of the Act: Rs. 43,43,207/-; (iii) addition of unsecured loan made under section

LAKSHYA PHARMA PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-16(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 553/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Sri S.S. Godaraa.Y. 2012-13 Lakshya Pharma Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-16(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcl 8214 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri D.V. Anjaneyulu Revenue By Sri M. Mahidhar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 01/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/09/2021 Order

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 251(2)Section 37(1)Section 43B

cash deposits – Rs. 87,637/- and (vi) Disallowance of 50% of expenditure towards business promotion and conveyance, boarding & lodging – Rs. 52,01,896/-] and raised a demand of Rs. 26,08,770/-. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. A.O., the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) granted part relief

RATNA INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYD, HYDERABAD

ITA 731/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

Deposit 0 0 0 100 100 Advance/Creditors 105 415 110 367 996 Staff Advance 58 41 0 41 140 Labour Charges 0 984 1004 813 2801 Other than Labour Charges 22 126 140 288 185 1565 1114 1461 4325 As could be seen from the chart, the amount of Rs.28.01 crores represent the labour charges paid in cash

RATNA INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYD, HYDERABAD

ITA 730/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

Deposit 0 0 0 100 100 Advance/Creditors 105 415 110 367 996 Staff Advance 58 41 0 41 140 Labour Charges 0 984 1004 813 2801 Other than Labour Charges 22 126 140 288 185 1565 1114 1461 4325 As could be seen from the chart, the amount of Rs.28.01 crores represent the labour charges paid in cash

SUKESINI KUMILI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-15(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 1539/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaappeal In Ita Nos. Assessee Revenue A.Ys 1536 To 1539/ Hyd/2025 Sukesini Kumili, Hyderabad Pan:Ckmpk5466J Income Tax Officer Ward 15(1), Hyderabad 2015-16 & 2016-17 निर्धारिती द्वारा /Assessee By: Advocate Shri S. Rama Rao राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By:: || Shri Madhukar Aves, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: | 07/01/2016 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 16/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: These Four Appeals Are Filed By Smt. Sukesini Kumili ("The Assessee") Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) For The A.Ys 2015-16 & 2016-17, All Dated 16.07.2025. Since Inter-Related Issues Are Involved In All These Four Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Advocate Shri S. Rama Rao
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151A(1)Section 153

Cash aggregating Rs. 2,00,000/- or more, with a banking company BANK OF BARODA 3 TRANSACTION AMOUNT 9,90,000 CIB-403 Time deposit exceeding Rs. 2,00,000/- with a banking company ANDHRA BANK- SITHAPHALMANDIBRANCH (545) 2 TRANSACTION AMOUNT 8,00,000 CIB-403 Time deposit exceeding Rs. 2,00,000/- with a banking company BANK OF BARODA

PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED MINARPALLY,MINARPALLY VILLAGE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIZAMABAD

ITA 140/HYD/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.140/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Primary Agricultural Vs. Income Tax Officer Cooperative Credit Society Ward 1 Ltd Minarpally, Minarpally Minarpally, Nizamabad Pan:Aabap7760J (Respondent) (Appellant) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: C.A Akshay Surana राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By:: Smt. Helen Ruby Jesindha, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 07/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd Minarpally (“The Assessee"), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 05.11.2024 For The A.Y, 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Page 1 Of 18

For Appellant: C.A Akshay Surana
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 80P

cash deposit of Rs.60,13,500/- in the bank account which is likely to amount to Rs. 50 lakh or more, it is established that the case of Primary Agricultural Co Op Credit Society Limited Minarpally (PAN: AABAP7760J) is a fit case for issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act for A.Y. 2016-17. 7. The order is passed

LAXMI VENKATA KRISHNA RICE CORPORATION,NALGONDA vs. ITO, WARD-1, SURYAPET

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

ITA 1700/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234ASection 69A

cash deposits of Rs.66.50 lakhs made in its bank account maintained with Andhra Bank, Kodad Branch, Suryapet, therefore, the AO held the 4 Laxmi Venkata Krishna Rice Corporation vs. ITO entire amount as its unexplained money under section 69A of the Act. Thereafter, the AO vide his order passed under section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated