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

disallowed by the first appellate authority as well as the validity of the reassessment proceedings. 6. The first issue that came up for our consideration from the assessee's appeal is the validity of re-opening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act. 7. The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri S. Rama Rao, submitted that the assessment

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

disallowed by the first appellate authority as well as the validity of the reassessment proceedings. 6. The first issue that came up for our consideration from the assessee's appeal is the validity of re-opening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act. 7. The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri S. Rama Rao, submitted that the assessment

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

disallowed by the first appellate authority as well as the validity of the reassessment proceedings. 6. The first issue that came up for our consideration from the assessee's appeal is the validity of re-opening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act. 7. The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri S. Rama Rao, submitted that the assessment

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. NETHI RAVI, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.594/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Nethi Ravi Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle 2(2) Pan:Adbpn7597F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ravi Bharadawaj, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

disallowance of claim of the assessee under section 24(b) of the Act. Accordingly, the assessment was completed by the Ld. AO under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 13.04.2022, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.2,51,65,528/-. 4. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee filed an appeal before

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1),, HYDERABAD vs. NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED, R.R. DIST, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

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

disallowance made by the AO following the decision of ITAT in assessee’s case for AY 2011-12 in ITA No. 1594/Hyd/2014 dated 20/03/2015. Submissions of Revenue 9. Before us, the Ld. departmental representative relied upon the order passed by the assessing officer, it was the contention the Ld. DR that the agriculture land was not taken on lease

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1),, HYDERABAD vs. NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED, R.R. DIST, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

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

disallowance made by the AO following the decision of ITAT in assessee’s case for AY 2011-12 in ITA No. 1594/Hyd/2014 dated 20/03/2015. Submissions of Revenue 9. Before us, the Ld. departmental representative relied upon the order passed by the assessing officer, it was the contention the Ld. DR that the agriculture land was not taken on lease

NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED,R.R.DIST. vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

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

disallowance made by the AO following the decision of ITAT in assessee’s case for AY 2011-12 in ITA No. 1594/Hyd/2014 dated 20/03/2015. Submissions of Revenue 9. Before us, the Ld. departmental representative relied upon the order passed by the assessing officer, it was the contention the Ld. DR that the agriculture land was not taken on lease

NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED,R.R.DIST. vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

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

disallowance made by the AO following the decision of ITAT in assessee’s case for AY 2011-12 in ITA No. 1594/Hyd/2014 dated 20/03/2015. Submissions of Revenue 9. Before us, the Ld. departmental representative relied upon the order passed by the assessing officer, it was the contention the Ld. DR that the agriculture land was not taken on lease

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

In the result, appeal ITA

Section 132(4) recorded on 22.08.2008, he\nstated that, he has made total contribution of Rs.50 lakhs\nto M/s. Vinobha Nagar Development Society for the period\nfrom December 2005 to till the year 2008. He has neither\ngiven any further details on the expenditure, manner in\nwhich he has contributed the said amount of Rs.50 lakhs to\nthe Society

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

131 of the Act, dated\n01.12.2018, the assessee, in reply to question no.17 stated\nthat, he has received an amount of Rs.45 lakhs by way of\ncash from one Sri Murali Goud for settlement of litigation in\nland admeasuring 45 acres owned by Sri Murali Goud at\nKuntloor Village, Hayat Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy\nDistrict, bearing Survey Nos. 278/2, 278/3

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

131 of the Act, dated\n01.12.2018, the assessee, in reply to question no.17 stated\nthat, he has received an amount of Rs.45 lakhs by way of\ncash from one Sri Murali Goud for settlement of litigation in\nland admeasuring 45 acres owned by Sri Murali Goud at\nKuntloor Village, Hayat Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy\nDistrict, bearing Survey Nos.278/2, 278/3, 278/9

CELESTIAL AVENUES PVT LTD REP. BY CSK PROPERTIES PVT LTD ON MERGER-PAN-AADCC3990R,HYDERABAD. vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha G, Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.212 To 214/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/S. Sabir, Sew & The Deputy Commissioner Of Prasad, Jv, Vs. Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 6(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Abcfs2425A अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

disallowances. Accordingly, the AO is directed to recompute the Section 80IA deduction on the final assessed income of the eligible industrial undertaking. This ensures that the deduction accurately reflects the undertaking's profits, consistent with statutory provisions and judicial interpretations. 17. The assessee's respective grounds in ITA No.1749/Ahd/2016 for AY 2012-13 are allowed.” 16. The co-ordinate Bench

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

131 of the Act, have confirmed execution of work and furnished supporting details, though some had initially made contrary statements during search. 75. We further find that, the primary objections of the Revenue such as engagement of employees of group companies as sub- contractors, alleged lack of proper documentation and appraisal systems, deficiencies pointed out in internal audit reports

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

131 of the Act, have confirmed execution of work and furnished supporting details, though some had initially made contrary statements during search. 75. We further find that, the primary objections of the Revenue such as engagement of employees of group companies as sub- contractors, alleged lack of proper documentation and appraisal systems, deficiencies pointed out in internal audit reports

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

131 of the Act, have confirmed execution of work and furnished supporting details, though some had initially made contrary statements during search. 75. We further find that, the primary objections of the Revenue such as engagement of employees of group companies as sub- contractors, alleged lack of proper documentation and appraisal systems, deficiencies pointed out in internal audit reports

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

131 of the Act, have confirmed execution of work and furnished supporting details, though some had initially made contrary statements during search. 75. We further find that, the primary objections of the Revenue such as engagement of employees of group companies as sub- contractors, alleged lack of proper documentation and appraisal systems, deficiencies pointed out in internal audit reports

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

131 of the Act, have confirmed execution of work and furnished supporting details, though some had initially made contrary statements during search. 75. We further find that, the primary objections of the Revenue such as engagement of employees of group companies as sub- contractors, alleged lack of proper documentation and appraisal systems, deficiencies pointed out in internal audit reports

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

131 of the Act, have confirmed execution of work and furnished supporting details, though some had initially made contrary statements during search. 75. We further find that, the primary objections of the Revenue such as engagement of employees of group companies as sub- contractors, alleged lack of proper documentation and appraisal systems, deficiencies pointed out in internal audit reports