MADHUSUDAN REDDY PASHAM,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

credits u/sec.68 of the 1,00,94,500 1,00,94,500 IT Act 1. Unexplained investment/deficit 15,23,285 8,66,20,135 cash balance 2. Profit earned out of real estate transaction 1,37,03,257 1,79,27,807 2007- 3. Disallowance

VIVA BOARDS PRIVATE LIMITED,NIZAMABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act and added it to the income of the assessee. Being aggrieved of such addition, assessee preferred appeal before the first appellate authority. 16. In course of hearing of appeal before the first appellate authority, out of the 9 persons in whose cases assessee could not produce confirmation letters before

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

In the result, appeal ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

unexplained cash credit of Rs.42,41,280/- towards additions made on account of undisclosed income from land transactions on the basis of ‘Lokpriya’ notebook found during the course of survey. Accordingly, ground no.6 of the assessee is allowed. 56. The next issue that came-up for consideration from ground no.7 of assessee’s appeal is, addition towards donation from undisclosed

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

unexplained investment in house property for\nRs.9,08,650/-\n41. During the course of search proceeding, it is\nnoticed that, Mr. Krishna Chandra, son of the assessee had\nmade an investment for purchase of residential Flat-404, 5th\nFloor, Subhalaxmi Apartments, Green Hills Colony,\nKothapet, Hyderabad in January 2005. The assessee was\nasked to clarify the source for such investment

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

unexplained cash credit. During the\ncourse of appellate proceedings also, in absence of\nsupporting documentary evidence filed by the assessee to\nsubstantiate his case, the learned CIT(A) has sustained the\naddition made by the Assessing Officer. He, therefore\nsubmitted that, the argument of the assessee that, the cash\nreceipts are pertains to Partnership Firm is an afterthought

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

unexplained\ninvestment in purchase of Flat held by assessee's son Mr.\nKrishna Chandra, though, there is no evidence that, the\nassessee has invested the same. Therefore, he submitted\nthat, the addition made by the Assessing Officer should be\ndeleted.\n44.\nSri Gurpreet Singh learned Sr. AR for the\nRevenue, on the other hand. supporting the order of the\nAssessing

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

In the result, appeal ITA

unexplained investment in purchase of flat held\nby son Sri Krishna Chandra though there is no evidence that the\nassessee has invested the same.\n7. For these and other grounds that may be urged, it is prayed that\nthe Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to allow the appeal.”\n38.\nThe first issue that came-up for consideration\nfrom ground

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

unexplained investment in purchase of flat held\nby son Sri Krishna Chandra though there is no evidence that the\nassessee has invested the same.\n6. The learned CIT(A) though states that the AO has discussed the\nreasons elaborately in the assessment order failed to deal with\nthe submissions of the assessee both at the time of assessment\nand

JOSHITA INFRA DEVELOPERS LLP,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The A.O. further noted that although the assessee has furnished relevant details of commission expenses of Rs. 2,05,32,164/-, but the fact remains that the commission expenditure incurred by the which comes to 21.23% of the total sales. Therefore, it was observed that the same is very high keeping

ITO., WARD 14(1), HYDERABAD vs. JOSHITA INFRA DEVELOPERS LLP, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The A.O. further noted that although the assessee has furnished relevant details of commission expenses of Rs. 2,05,32,164/-, but the fact remains that the commission expenditure incurred by the which comes to 21.23% of the total sales. Therefore, it was observed that the same is very high keeping

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.

credit for cash in hand available with the assessee, and therefore, allowed relief to the extent of Rs. 2.12 crores out of total addition made by the AO towards cash deposit of Rs.5,90,35,000/- and sustained balance cash deposits of Rs.3,78,35,000/- as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Act. The relevant findings

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.

credit for cash in hand available with the assessee, and therefore, allowed relief to the extent of Rs. 2.12 crores out of total addition made by the AO towards cash deposit of Rs.5,90,35,000/- and sustained balance cash deposits of Rs.3,78,35,000/- as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Act. The relevant findings

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.

credit for cash in hand available with the assessee, and therefore, allowed relief to the extent of Rs. 2.12 crores out of total addition made by the AO towards cash deposit of Rs.5,90,35,000/- and sustained balance cash deposits of Rs.3,78,35,000/- as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Act. The relevant findings

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.

credit for cash in hand available with the assessee, and therefore, allowed relief to the extent of Rs. 2.12 crores out of total addition made by the AO towards cash deposit of Rs.5,90,35,000/- and sustained balance cash deposits of Rs.3,78,35,000/- as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Act. The relevant findings

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.

credit for cash in hand available with the assessee, and therefore, allowed relief to the extent of Rs. 2.12 crores out of total addition made by the AO towards cash deposit of Rs.5,90,35,000/- and sustained balance cash deposits of Rs.3,78,35,000/- as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Act. The relevant findings

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1) , HYDERABAD vs. S A BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS , HYDERABAD

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

unexplained cash\ncredits, even though the assessee failed to prove the\nidentity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the\ntransaction.\n7. The ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in deleting addition of\nRs.12,76,50,000/- made towards disallowance u/s.\n40(a)(ia) even though the assessee failed to remit the\ncorresponding TDS to Govt. Account.\n8. The appellant craves leave to amend

S A BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS ,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2) , HYDERABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

unexplained cash\ncredits, even though the assessee failed to prove the\nidentity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the\ntransaction.\n7. The ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in deleting addition of\nRs.12,76,50,000/- made towards disallowance u/s.\n40(a)(ia) even though the assessee failed to remit the\ncorresponding TDS to Govt. Account.\n8. The appellant craves leave to amend

GANGADHARAN RENGANATHAN KOMAL,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

unexplained, therefore, no interference is required in the order of the AO. The taxpayer has a greater responsibility of explaining the transaction and also explaining why all these payments were made on a recurring basis in cash towards credit card dues. The appellant cannot shirk from his responsibility of proving the source of the cash with which he could settle