MRL TRADING COMPANY,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-7(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

demonetization. The Assessing Officer then\nmade the disallowance by giving the reasoning in Paras 3.5\nand 3.6 as under:\n“3.5. That

NALGONDA REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED ,SECUNDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

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

disallowance u/s 14A of the Act and addition towards cash deposits during the demonetization period. 28. The assessee carried the matter

NALGONDA REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

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

disallowance u/s 14A of the Act and addition towards cash deposits during the demonetization period. 28. The assessee carried the matter

NALGONDA REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

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

disallowance u/s 14A of the Act and addition towards cash deposits during the demonetization period. 28. The assessee carried the matter

SUJALA PIPES PRIVATE LIMITED,NANDYAL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee company are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us:

demonetization scheme by the Govt of India. 4. The Learned CIT(A) and the A.O. are not justified in confirming / making disallowance

SUJALA PIPES PRIVATE LIMITED,NANDYAL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee company are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us:

demonetization scheme by the Govt of India. 4. The Learned CIT(A) and the A.O. are not justified in confirming / making disallowance

CREAMLINE DAIRY PRODUCTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

disallowance of bad debts written-off at Rs.1,01,75,503/- and addition towards cash deposit into bank account during the demonetization

DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. CREAMLINE DAIRY PRODUCTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

disallowance of bad debts written-off at Rs.1,01,75,503/- and addition towards cash deposit into bank account during the demonetization

CREAMLINE DAIRY PRODUCTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

disallowance of bad debts written-off at Rs.1,01,75,503/- and addition towards cash deposit into bank account during the demonetization

VIJAYKUMAR GOLANA,MEDAK vs. ITO., WARD-1, SANGAREDDY

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

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary

demonetization period of Rs. 4,92,260/- on account of estimate of business profits at 8% of the turnover, and Rs. 1,82,300/- by disallowing

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

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:

demonetization period: Rs.4,89,51,132/-; (iii) addition of unproved sundry creditors under section 68 of the Act: Rs. 43,43,207/-; (iv) addition of unsecured loans under section 68 of the Act: Rs.16,19,208/-; (v) disallowance

VENKATA SWAMY KATAKAM,JAYASHANKAR BHUPALPALLY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARANGAL

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

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 124/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Venkata Swamy Katakam, Income Tax Officer, Jangedu, Bhupalpally Vs. Ward-2, [Pan : Amupk5536B] Warangal अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

demonetization period; Grounds No. 3 & 4 relate to the addition by estimating the net profits of the assessee @8% of the total bank credits during the year and Ground No. 5 relates to the addition by disallowance

SIDHI JEWELLERS,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and the appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.729 & 755/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18) The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sidhi Jewellers, Ward 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad.. Pan No.Aagfs4330P. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.750 & 751/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18) Sidhi Jewellers, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward 6(1), Hyderabad. Pan No.Aagfs4330P. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Ramarao, Advocate. रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr.

demonetization period in view of maximum limitation, which could only be deposited, being cash in hand as per cash book of the appellant and therefore the balance cash deposits of Rs.3,78,35,000/- is remained unexplained as inference drawn by the AO of disallowing

ITO., WARD -6(1), HYDERABAD vs. SIDHI JEWELLERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and the appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.729 & 755/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18) The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sidhi Jewellers, Ward 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad.. Pan No.Aagfs4330P. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.750 & 751/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18) Sidhi Jewellers, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward 6(1), Hyderabad. Pan No.Aagfs4330P. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Ramarao, Advocate. रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr.

demonetization period in view of maximum limitation, which could only be deposited, being cash in hand as per cash book of the appellant and therefore the balance cash deposits of Rs.3,78,35,000/- is remained unexplained as inference drawn by the AO of disallowing

SIDHI JEWELLERS,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and the appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.729 & 755/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18) The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sidhi Jewellers, Ward 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad.. Pan No.Aagfs4330P. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.750 & 751/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18) Sidhi Jewellers, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward 6(1), Hyderabad. Pan No.Aagfs4330P. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Ramarao, Advocate. रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr.

demonetization period in view of maximum limitation, which could only be deposited, being cash in hand as per cash book of the appellant and therefore the balance cash deposits of Rs.3,78,35,000/- is remained unexplained as inference drawn by the AO of disallowing

ITO., WARD -6(1), HYDERABAD vs. SIDHI JEWELLERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and the appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.729 & 755/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18) The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sidhi Jewellers, Ward 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad.. Pan No.Aagfs4330P. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.750 & 751/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18) Sidhi Jewellers, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward 6(1), Hyderabad. Pan No.Aagfs4330P. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Ramarao, Advocate. रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr.

demonetization period in view of maximum limitation, which could only be deposited, being cash in hand as per cash book of the appellant and therefore the balance cash deposits of Rs.3,78,35,000/- is remained unexplained as inference drawn by the AO of disallowing

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. VASUDEVA REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and the appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.729 & 755/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18) The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sidhi Jewellers, Ward 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad.. Pan No.Aagfs4330P. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.750 & 751/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18) Sidhi Jewellers, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward 6(1), Hyderabad. Pan No.Aagfs4330P. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Ramarao, Advocate. रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr.

demonetization period in view of maximum limitation, which could only be deposited, being cash in hand as per cash book of the appellant and therefore the balance cash deposits of Rs.3,78,35,000/- is remained unexplained as inference drawn by the AO of disallowing

NATURE NIVAS DEVELOPERS,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-9(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 176/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Nature Nivas Developers Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 9(3) Pan:Aalfn3216E Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Manoj, Ca For Sreelata Vootkoor, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/04/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/04/2024

demonetization period. Therefore, called upon the assessee to file the necessary evidences including the source for cash deposits. Since, the appellant could not furnish the requisite details, the Assessing Officer made addition towards cash deposits u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the I.T. Act. The Assessing Officer had also made addition towards disallowance