SHRI S SUBHASH,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CC-2, HYD., HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal for AY 2008-09 is also partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

unexplained investments in house property. Assessee submitted that he had constructed a :- 19 -: Shri S. Subhash (08 Appeals) house in plot

SHRI S SUBHASH,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CC-2, HYD., HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal for AY 2008-09 is also partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

unexplained investments in house property. Assessee submitted that he had constructed a :- 19 -: Shri S. Subhash (08 Appeals) house in plot

SHRI S SUBHASH,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CC-2, HYD., HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal for AY 2008-09 is also partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

unexplained investments in house property. Assessee submitted that he had constructed a :- 19 -: Shri S. Subhash (08 Appeals) house in plot

SHRI S SUBHASH,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal for AY 2008-09 is also partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

unexplained investments in house property. Assessee submitted that he had constructed a :- 19 -: Shri S. Subhash (08 Appeals) house in plot

SHRI S SUBHASH,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CC-2, HYD., HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal for AY 2008-09 is also partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

unexplained investments in house property. Assessee submitted that he had constructed a :- 19 -: Shri S. Subhash (08 Appeals) house in plot

SHRI S SUBHASH,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal for AY 2008-09 is also partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

unexplained investments in house property. Assessee submitted that he had constructed a :- 19 -: Shri S. Subhash (08 Appeals) house in plot

INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERABAD vs. ARUNA GULLAPALLI, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Aruna Gullapalli, (International Taxation) – 1, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan No.Bfhpg9489L. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue By: Shri Kumar Adithya Date Of Hearing: 23.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.01.2023

investment in residential house in the light of the fact that such shares entitled the assessee to a house property as a member". 12.7 Thus, in the instant cape, it is factually demonstrated that the appellant has reinvested the whole sale consideration in pursuance of a house property well before the filing of return of income The intent

MANOJ KUMAR CHOWRAH,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

unexplained investment for failure of the assessee to explain source for purchase of the property. Similarly, the A.O. further 4 Manoj Kumar Chowrah observed that, the assessee has computed short term capital gain from sale of property and also claimed cost of improvement for Rs. 1,00,000/- for which no supporting evidence has been furnished. Therefore, he observed cost

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 investment in house property for Rs.9,08,650/- 41. During the course of search proceeding, it is noticed that

PRADYUMNA AGROS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1033/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Pradyumna Agro Private Vs. Acit Limited Central Circle-2(4) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aajcp4282H] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri M.V.Prasad & Shri K.S.Rajendra Kumar, Ar Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 10/01/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.09.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld.Cit(A)]-12, Hyderabad, Pertaining To A.Y.2020-21 On The Following Grounds : 1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad Is Erroneous & Opposed To The Facts Of The Case & Law.

property and made additions towards the difference as unexplained investment. 6. The Ld.CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the appellant and also taking note of the remand report of the Assessing Officer on this issue, rejected the legal ground taken by the appellant, challenging the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer for initiation of proceedings u/s 153C

JANAPRIYA ENGINEERS SYNDICATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS JANAPRIYA ENGINEERS SYNDICATE PVT. LTD.),HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

unexplained investment Vide paragraph 7.2 of the assessment order. 11. The Appellate Commissioner erred in giving a direction to the AO to assess an amount of Rs,45,00,000/- in the A.Y 2009-10 . 11. Any other grounds which the assessee may urge either before or at the time of hearing. 8. As regards ground

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, HYDERABAD vs. M/S. ENGINEERS REDDY P. LTD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

unexplained investment Vide paragraph 7.2 of the assessment order. 11. The Appellate Commissioner erred in giving a direction to the AO to assess an amount of Rs,45,00,000/- in the A.Y 2009-10 . 11. Any other grounds which the assessee may urge either before or at the time of hearing. 8. As regards ground

JANAPRIYA ENGINEERS SYNDICATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS JANAPRIYA ENGINEERS SYNDICATE PVT. LTD.),HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

unexplained investment Vide paragraph 7.2 of the assessment order. 11. The Appellate Commissioner erred in giving a direction to the AO to assess an amount of Rs,45,00,000/- in the A.Y 2009-10 . 11. Any other grounds which the assessee may urge either before or at the time of hearing. 8. As regards ground

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, HYDERABAD vs. M/S. ENGINEERS REDDY P. LTD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

unexplained investment Vide paragraph 7.2 of the assessment order. 11. The Appellate Commissioner erred in giving a direction to the AO to assess an amount of Rs,45,00,000/- in the A.Y 2009-10 . 11. Any other grounds which the assessee may urge either before or at the time of hearing. 8. As regards ground

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. JANAPRIYA ENGINEERS SYNDICATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

unexplained investment Vide paragraph 7.2 of the assessment order. 11. The Appellate Commissioner erred in giving a direction to the AO to assess an amount of Rs,45,00,000/- in the A.Y 2009-10 . 11. Any other grounds which the assessee may urge either before or at the time of hearing. 8. As regards ground

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. JANAPRIYA ENGINEERS SYNDICATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

unexplained investment Vide paragraph 7.2 of the assessment order. 11. The Appellate Commissioner erred in giving a direction to the AO to assess an amount of Rs,45,00,000/- in the A.Y 2009-10 . 11. Any other grounds which the assessee may urge either before or at the time of hearing. 8. As regards ground

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. PRAKASH NIMMAGADDA, HYDERABAD, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.974/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy.Cit Vs. Shri Prakash Nimmagadda Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acbpn4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/12/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order, Dated 20/03/2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-9, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:

house rent, capital gain and other sources and there is no income under the head “business or profession”. The transactions of the acquisition of shares by the assessee of these 3 companies are in the nature of investments and therefore, there is no involvement in business activity on the part of the assessee while acquiring the shares of these

ASSIATANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ZAINAB INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.66/Hyd/2021 To 69/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Zainab Income Tax Investments Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.70/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Zainab Income Tax Investments Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.111/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2018-19) M/S Zainab Investments Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 20/02/2025 Pronouncement:

House International (P) Ltd. (supra). Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax, Orissa vs Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. (supra) has considered similar issue and held that once, genuineness and creditworthiness and identity of investors are established, no additions can be made as cash credit, on the ground that investor company and directors have