SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

additional income estimated and offered\n2. It is submitted that nothing can be more unreasonable, arbitrary, and\ncontrary to the facts of the case, and the related legal position, than to add the\nentire turnover to the total income of the assessee. First, suppressed turnover in the\ncase of the assessee. Second, the total turnover and the additional income\nhave

SKANDA INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

income has to be same for\ndisclosed and undisclosed turnover, as no separate\nestablishments are found to allow any additional claim. The\nnon-substantive nature of the claim of expenses towards\npayments to landlords over and above the registered value\nalso has a bearing on the profit margin of the undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SYED IMRANUDDIN, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No Revenue Assessee A.Y 1 432/Hyd/2022 Acit, Syed 2018- Central Zeeshanuddin 19 Circle 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Bqgps0128A 2 436/Hyd/2022 & -Do- Syed Imranuddin 2017- 437/Hyd/2022 Hyderabad 18 3 Pan:Aajpi6494F 4 442/Hyd/2022 -Do- Syed Irfanuddin 2018- Hyderabad 19 Pan:Aappi4693A िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr

additional income declared by the assessee under the head “Income from business” to tax under the normal rate of taxes. 12. The assessee has relied upon the decision of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Bajaj Sons Ltd vs. DCIT (Supra). The Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal under identical set of facts held as under: "We find that

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SYED IRFANUDDIN, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No Revenue Assessee A.Y 1 432/Hyd/2022 Acit, Syed 2018- Central Zeeshanuddin 19 Circle 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Bqgps0128A 2 436/Hyd/2022 & -Do- Syed Imranuddin 2017- 437/Hyd/2022 Hyderabad 18 3 Pan:Aajpi6494F 4 442/Hyd/2022 -Do- Syed Irfanuddin 2018- Hyderabad 19 Pan:Aappi4693A िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr

additional income declared by the assessee under the head “Income from business” to tax under the normal rate of taxes. 12. The assessee has relied upon the decision of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Bajaj Sons Ltd vs. DCIT (Supra). The Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal under identical set of facts held as under: "We find that

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SYED IMRANUDDIN, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No Revenue Assessee A.Y 1 432/Hyd/2022 Acit, Syed 2018- Central Zeeshanuddin 19 Circle 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Bqgps0128A 2 436/Hyd/2022 & -Do- Syed Imranuddin 2017- 437/Hyd/2022 Hyderabad 18 3 Pan:Aajpi6494F 4 442/Hyd/2022 -Do- Syed Irfanuddin 2018- Hyderabad 19 Pan:Aappi4693A िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr

additional income declared by the assessee under the head “Income from business” to tax under the normal rate of taxes. 12. The assessee has relied upon the decision of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Bajaj Sons Ltd vs. DCIT (Supra). The Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal under identical set of facts held as under: "We find that

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SYED ZEESHANUDDIN, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No Revenue Assessee A.Y 1 432/Hyd/2022 Acit, Syed 2018- Central Zeeshanuddin 19 Circle 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Bqgps0128A 2 436/Hyd/2022 & -Do- Syed Imranuddin 2017- 437/Hyd/2022 Hyderabad 18 3 Pan:Aajpi6494F 4 442/Hyd/2022 -Do- Syed Irfanuddin 2018- Hyderabad 19 Pan:Aappi4693A िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr

additional income declared by the assessee under the head “Income from business” to tax under the normal rate of taxes. 12. The assessee has relied upon the decision of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Bajaj Sons Ltd vs. DCIT (Supra). The Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal under identical set of facts held as under: "We find that

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PVT. LTD., BANGALORE

income has to be same for\ndisclosed and undisclosed turnover, as no separate\nestablishments are found to allow any additional claim. The\nnon-substantive nature of the claim of expenses towards\npayments to landlords over and above the registered value\nalso has a bearing on the profit margin of the undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part

SKANDA INFRA PROJECTS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

additional income in the returns, in filed consequence of the search\naction, and paid the taxes due.\nc. The additional turnover and the income arising thereof have been\nestimated so as to honour the disclosure amount even though the seized\nmaterial was throwing spanners in such exercise of estimation.\nd. There were problems while transferring data from Tally

SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

income has to be same for\ndisclosed and undisclosed turnover, as no separate\nestablishments are found to allow any additional claim. The\nnon-substantive nature of the claim of expenses towards\npayments to landlords over and above the registered value\nalso has a bearing on the profit margin of the undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part

SKANDA BUILDERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), HYDERABAD

income has to be same for \ndisclosed and undisclosed turnover, as no separate \nestablishments are found to allow any additional claim. The \nnon-substantive nature of the claim of expenses towards \npayments to landlords over and above the registered value \nalso has a bearing on the profit margin of the undisclosed \nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part

SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

income has to be same for\ndisclosed and undisclosed turnover, as no separate\nestablishments are found to allow any additional claim. The\nnon-substantive nature of the claim of expenses towards\npayments to landlords over and above the registered value\nalso has a bearing on the profit margin of the undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part

SKANDA BUILDERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), HYDERABAD

income has to be same for\ndisclosed and undisclosed turnover, as no separate\nestablishments are found to allow any additional claim. The\nnon-substantive nature of the claim of expenses towards\npayments to landlords over and above the registered value\nalso has a bearing on the profit margin of the undisclosed\nturnover of the assessee. Further, nature of part

VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

Income Tax Rules, 1962 (“the Rules”) addition of Rs.2,06,150/- debited under ‘deferred revenue expenditure’ and addition of Rs.14,71,4315/- being estimated disallowance

VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

Income Tax Rules, 1962 (“the Rules”) addition of Rs.2,06,150/- debited under ‘deferred revenue expenditure’ and addition of Rs.14,71,4315/- being estimated disallowance

VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

Income Tax Rules, 1962 (“the Rules”) addition of Rs.2,06,150/- debited under ‘deferred revenue expenditure’ and addition of Rs.14,71,4315/- being estimated disallowance

VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

Income Tax Rules, 1962 (“the Rules”) addition of Rs.2,06,150/- debited under ‘deferred revenue expenditure’ and addition of Rs.14,71,4315/- being estimated disallowance

VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

Income Tax Rules, 1962 (“the Rules”) addition of Rs.2,06,150/- debited under ‘deferred revenue expenditure’ and addition of Rs.14,71,4315/- being estimated disallowance