DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. TRACKS & TOWERS INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED(PART IX), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

263 proceedings are pending. The order u/s. 143(1) is placed at pages 211-222 of paper book volume-2. Referring to pages 223-227 of the paper book volume-2, he submitted that the AO in the order passed u/s. 143(3) for AY 2020-21 has allowed the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA. Referring to the decision

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. TRACKS & TOWERS INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED(PART IX), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

263 proceedings are pending. The order u/s. 143(1) is placed at pages 211-222 of paper book volume-2. Referring to pages 223-227 of the paper book volume-2, he submitted that the AO in the order passed u/s. 143(3) for AY 2020-21 has allowed the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA. Referring to the decision

SURENDRA BABU SABBINENI,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2010-11

revised return of income on 25.11.2011 admitting income of Rs.22,31,37,160/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. Page 1 of 14 ITA 326 of 2018 Surendra Babu Sabbineni 153A of the Act on 31.3.2014 accepting the returned income. Subsequently, the Pr. CIT, Central, Hyderabad initiated proceedings u/s 263

HARISH KUMAR MURALIDHAR HARWANI ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERS ,WARD-3(1) , HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year:2016-17 Shri Harish Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer Muralidhar Harwani, Ward 3(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aayph0485N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 21/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/04/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.03.2021 Of The Learned Pr.Cit -1, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2016-17. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, However, These All Relate To The Validity Of The Order Passed U/S 263 Of The I.T. Act By The Pcit-I.

house property, Rs.5,97,000/- from salary, Rs.18,96,125/- from business, Rs. Nil from capital gains and Rs.19,90,573/- from other sources. He noted that the case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS to verify the “low income from TCS receipts-liquor”. However, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act and accepted

KUSHAL DAS DAYARAM MANGHANANI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Kushal Das Dayaram Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Manghanani, Circle – 5(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Agbpm9633N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri M.V. Joshi, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr. Ar. 20.03.2024 Date Of Hearing: Date Of Pronouncement: 22.03.2024

house property to the total income of the assessee and passed order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 06.12.2019. 4. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the assessing officer, assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal of assessee. 5. Feeling aggrieved with the order of ld.CIT(A), assessee

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

263 but had not given any finding as whether the income is to be assessed under the head ‘business income or income from house property’. Subsequently, for A.Y. 2010-11 in ITA No. 1774/Hyd/2014 and ITA No. 727/Hyd/2015 dated 11.07.2016 again in a revisionary proceeding the Tribunal held that even if the assessee has assessed the income as income from

SOMIREDDY SUDHAKAR REDDY,IBRAHIMPATNAM vs. ITO., WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1505/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Somireddy Sudhakar The Income Tax Officer, Reddy, Ibrahimpatnam Vs. Ward-9(1), Pin -501 506. R R Dist. Hyderabad. Pan Bghps3108R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Abhinav Pittal, Sr. Ar

property. This should be paid as per demand notice u/s. 156 enclosed MOHAN KUMAR R RANGE-9, HYDERABAD Addl. Commr. of Income Tax, Range-9, Hyderabad.” 6. Thus, it is clear from the impugned order u/sec.271D that there was no Reference by the Assessing Officer and also there were no assessment proceedings or any other proceedings in the case

BANDA SATYANARAYA ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERS ,WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.408/Hyd/2021 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Shri Banda Satyanarayana Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 9(4) Pan:Acepb2895C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate T.Chaitanya Kumar, राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 31/07/2024 आदेश/Order

housing loan availed from Bank of India, advance received from sale of plots and unsecured loan taken from various persons. The Assessing Officer after considering the relevant submission of the assessee completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the I.T. Act, 1961 on 05.02.2019 and determined the total income at Rs.17,66,130/-, where the Income Tax Officer

HIMASAGAR KRISHNA MUTHAPPAGARI,TIRUPATI vs. ITO., WARD-2(3), TIRUPATI

Bench: Us.

263 of the Act. 8. Although the assessee objected to the exercise of the revisional jurisdiction by the Pr. CIT for two-fold reasons, viz. (i) that the capital gain disclosed by the assessee was examined twice by the Assessing Officer; and (ii) that the purported revision of the assessment order based on an audit objection was not permitted under

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

property.\nThis should be paid as per demand notice u/s. 156 enclosed\nSd/-MOHAN KUMAR R\nRANGE-9, HYDERABAD\nAddl. Commr. of Income Tax,\nRange-9, Hyderabad.”\n6.\nThus, it is clear from the impugned order u/sec.271D that there\nwas no Reference by the Assessing Officer and also there were no\nassessment proceedings or any other proceedings in the case

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, three appeals i

property.\nThis should be paid as per demand notice u/s. 156 enclosed\nSd/-MOHAN KUMAR R\nRANGE-9, HYDERABAD\nAddl. Commr. of Income Tax,\nRange-9, Hyderabad.\"\n6.\nThus, it is clear from the impugned order u/sec.271D that there\nwas no Reference by the Assessing Officer and also there were no\nassessment proceedings or any other proceedings in the case

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

property.\nThis should be paid as per demand notice u/s. 156 enclosed\nSd/-MOHAN KUMAR R\nRANGE-9, HYDERABAD\nAddl. Commr. of Income Tax,\nRange-9, Hyderabad.\"\n6.\nThus, it is clear from the impugned order u/sec.271D that there\nwas no Reference by the Assessing Officer and also there were no\nassessment proceedings or any other proceedings in the case

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

property.\nThis should be paid as per demand notice u/s. 156 enclosed\nSd/-MOHAN KUMAR R\nRANGE-9, HYDERABAD\nAddl. Commr. of Income Tax,\nRange-9, Hyderabad.”\n6.\nThus, it is clear from the impugned order u/sec.271D that there\nwas no Reference by the Assessing Officer and also there were no\nassessment proceedings or any other proceedings in the case

KESIREDDY RAVINDER REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

property.\nThis should be paid as per demand notice u/s. 156 enclosed\nSd/-MOHAN KUMAR R\nRANGE-9, HYDERABAD\nAddl. Commr. of Income Tax,\nRange-9, Hyderabad.”\n6. Thus, it is clear from the impugned order u/sec.271D that\nthere was no Reference by the Assessing Officer and also there were\nno assessment proceedings or any other proceedings in the case

SURENDER KUMAR BHOJWANI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, INTL. TAXTION -1, HYDERABAD

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

revised return, it can still be raised, if relevant material is available on record before the appellate authorities, i.e., CIT(A) and the Tribunal by themselves; or on remand by the AO is supported by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT vs. Abhinitha Foundation

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

revised returns reflecting the\nadditional income disclosed during the search. This corroborates\nthe AO's assertion that the disclosure was not entirely voluntary but\nwas compelled by the incriminating evidences unearthed during the\nsearch.\niii) The appellant's claim of "voluntary disclosure" does not absolve it of\nthe obligation to compute income accurately based on material\nevidence. The disclosures made

PATNA BAKHTIYARPUR TOLLWAY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Bleassessment Year – 2017-18 Patna Bakhtiyarpur Tollway Vs. Acit Circle-16(2) Limited Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan : Aafcp9577K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S.Rama Rao, Ar Revenue By: Ms.K.Haritha, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.12.2024 31.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement:

revised return was filed on 21.01.2019, admitting the loss of Rs.197,66,10,848/-. The case 4 was selected for scrutiny and the Assessing Officer issued notices u/s 142(1) and 143(2) of the Act, calling for certain details. In response, the assessee filed the details and the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s