INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHITTOOR vs. G VIJAYASIMHA REDDY, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

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

Penalty initiated separately proceedings Act, Proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) 1961. u/s 271(1)(c) are initiated The are initiated separately appeal is separately. allowed 2 Vishnu ACWPN3597R ACIT, Assessment Assessee filed No scrutiny No appeal Swaroop Reddy Circle-6, completed u/s 143(3) appeal assessment Narapareddy Hyd on 03.03.2016 against order making addition u/s 143(3). towards LONG

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

house bearing Municipal No.17-1- 336/1/29, Plot No.29, situated at S.N. Reddy Nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad for a total sole consideration of Rs.43,50,000/- vide Sale deed No 4535/2016, dated 12.09.2016. During this transaction, the vendor accepted Rs.43,50,000/- in cash in contravention to the provision of Section 269SS of the Income-tax Act, 1961 which attracts penalty u/s.271D. Section

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

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

LATE NIMMATOORI RAJA BABU,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.Nos.596 & 597/Hyd

271, a proper satisfaction must be recorded\nto initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271D instead of a mere\nstatement given by the AO in his order dated 21.12.2019.\n9. a. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing ground nos. 11,12,13 & 15\ntaken before him.\nb. Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to\nhave appreciated that

DAMODAR RAO BIBINAGAR,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-13(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Damodar Rao Bibinagar, Vs. The Additional 1-8-74/6, Commissioner Of Income Chikkadapally, Tax, Hyderabad, Hyderabad. Telangana – 500020. Pan : Afjpb5620F. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate. Revenue By: Ms. Harshita Chouhan, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 26/12/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/12/2023

penalty of Rs.13,10,000/- i.e., the sum equal to the amount of the cash of Rs.13,10,000/- received towards sale consideration, in accordance with the provisions of section 271 D of the Act. Thus, Assessing Officer passed order u/s 271D of the Act dt.28.09.2022. 4. Feeling aggrieved with the order of Assessing Officer passed u/s 271D

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. VIRENDER KUMAR GUPTA, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Sri Jitender Kumar Gupta Vs. A.C.I.T Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aappg6606B Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sri Virender Kumar Gupta Vs. A.C.I.T Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaspg1887D Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca Revenue By: Smt. T.H. Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 25/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/10/2023 Order Per Laliet Kumar, J.M These Are The Two Connected Appeals Filed By The Respective Assessees Are Directed Against The Common Order Dated 27.07.2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad Relating To A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. Since Identical Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessees In Both These Appeals, Therefore, For Page 1 Of 23

house property, capital gains, share income as partner in firms and other sources. He filed his return of income for the A.Y 2012-13 on 22.12.2012 declaring total income of Rs.26,07,520/-. Subsequently, a search operation u/s 132 was conducted on 2.5.2018 in the business premises of M/s. Jatinder Roller Flour Mills wherein the assessee is a partner. Notices

JITENDER KUMAR GUPTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Sri Jitender Kumar Gupta Vs. A.C.I.T Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aappg6606B Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sri Virender Kumar Gupta Vs. A.C.I.T Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaspg1887D Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca Revenue By: Smt. T.H. Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 25/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/10/2023 Order Per Laliet Kumar, J.M These Are The Two Connected Appeals Filed By The Respective Assessees Are Directed Against The Common Order Dated 27.07.2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad Relating To A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. Since Identical Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessees In Both These Appeals, Therefore, For Page 1 Of 23

house property, capital gains, share income as partner in firms and other sources. He filed his return of income for the A.Y 2012-13 on 22.12.2012 declaring total income of Rs.26,07,520/-. Subsequently, a search operation u/s 132 was conducted on 2.5.2018 in the business premises of M/s. Jatinder Roller Flour Mills wherein the assessee is a partner. Notices

ARUN KUMAR DHONDI KUBEER,ARMOOR vs. ITO., WARD-1, NIZAMABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumara N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.667 To 670/Hyd/2024 & Sa Nos. 17 To 19/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14) Shri Arun Kumar Dhondi Vs. Income Tax Officer Kubeer, Armoor Ward-1 Pan:Aazpd7647P Nizamabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: C.A. K Hanmandloo राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Sr-Ar Shri R Kumaran Appeared For Sr.Ar Shri Madam Mohan Meena सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/12/2024 आदेश/Order

house property, share of profits from Partnership firms (i) Arun Paints and Hardware and (ii) M/s. Navanatha Puri Finance Corporation, capital gains, interest income as well as agricultural income. The assessee filed his Return of Income for the Asst. Year 2011-12 on 04.05.2018 admitting a total income of Rs.5,29,400 and estimated Agricultural income of Rs.1

ARUN KUMAR DHONDI KUBEER,ARMOOR vs. ITO., WARD-1, NIZAMABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumara N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.667 To 670/Hyd/2024 & Sa Nos. 17 To 19/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14) Shri Arun Kumar Dhondi Vs. Income Tax Officer Kubeer, Armoor Ward-1 Pan:Aazpd7647P Nizamabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: C.A. K Hanmandloo राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Sr-Ar Shri R Kumaran Appeared For Sr.Ar Shri Madam Mohan Meena सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/12/2024 आदेश/Order

house property, share of profits from Partnership firms (i) Arun Paints and Hardware and (ii) M/s. Navanatha Puri Finance Corporation, capital gains, interest income as well as agricultural income. The assessee filed his Return of Income for the Asst. Year 2011-12 on 04.05.2018 admitting a total income of Rs.5,29,400 and estimated Agricultural income of Rs.1

ARUN KUMAR DHONDI KUBEER,ARMOOR vs. ITO., WARD-1, NIZAMABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumara N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.667 To 670/Hyd/2024 & Sa Nos. 17 To 19/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14) Shri Arun Kumar Dhondi Vs. Income Tax Officer Kubeer, Armoor Ward-1 Pan:Aazpd7647P Nizamabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: C.A. K Hanmandloo राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Sr-Ar Shri R Kumaran Appeared For Sr.Ar Shri Madam Mohan Meena सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/12/2024 आदेश/Order

house property, share of profits from Partnership firms (i) Arun Paints and Hardware and (ii) M/s. Navanatha Puri Finance Corporation, capital gains, interest income as well as agricultural income. The assessee filed his Return of Income for the Asst. Year 2011-12 on 04.05.2018 admitting a total income of Rs.5,29,400 and estimated Agricultural income of Rs.1

ARUN KUMAR DHONDI KUBEER,ARMOOR vs. ITO., WARD-1, NIZAMABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumara N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.667 To 670/Hyd/2024 & Sa Nos. 17 To 19/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14) Shri Arun Kumar Dhondi Vs. Income Tax Officer Kubeer, Armoor Ward-1 Pan:Aazpd7647P Nizamabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: C.A. K Hanmandloo राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Sr-Ar Shri R Kumaran Appeared For Sr.Ar Shri Madam Mohan Meena सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/12/2024 आदेश/Order

house property, share of profits from Partnership firms (i) Arun Paints and Hardware and (ii) M/s. Navanatha Puri Finance Corporation, capital gains, interest income as well as agricultural income. The assessee filed his Return of Income for the Asst. Year 2011-12 on 04.05.2018 admitting a total income of Rs.5,29,400 and estimated Agricultural income of Rs.1

SRI SAI KRISHNA RICE INDUSTRY,KHAMMAM vs. ITO., WARD-1, KHAMMAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for sta"s"cal purposes as indicated herein above

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 1135/Hyd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Sri Sai Krishna Rice Income Tax Officer, Industry, Vs. Ward-(1), Khammam. Khammam. [Pan : Abdfs6805R] अपीलाथ" / Appellant "" यथ" / Respondent

penalty proceedings U/s 271(1)(c) of the Act while passing the assessment order. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A). 5. During the First Appellate Proceedings, assessee made various submissions however, the learned CIT(A) did not consider the same and dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte by holding that assessee had failed

DEEPAK NAGORI ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year:2012-13 Shri Deepak Nagori Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 8(3) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Abspn3300M Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri K. Madhusudan, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 07/12/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 12/12/2023 Order Per Laliet Kumar, J.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.05.2018 Of The Learned Cit (A)-2, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2012-13. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Reads As Under: “1. That The Appellant Is An Individual & Filed His Income Tax Return (Tr) For Fy 2011-12 By Declaring Income Of Rs.5,82,686/-. The Itr Includes Long Term Capital Gains Of Rs.23,08,721/- & Claimed Exemption Under Section 10(38) Of It Act 1961. Notices Issued Under Section 148 & Notice Under Section 142(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Ao Passed The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The I.T Act, 1961 & The Same Was Upheld By Ld. Cit(A).

house property and other sources, filed his return of income for the A.Y 2012-13 on 30.07.2012 declaring total income of Rs.5,82,686/-. The assessee has also made a claim for exempt income of Rs.27,93,085/- on account of long- term capital gains. Page 2 of 16 ITA 1713 of 2018 3.1. During the course of assessment

MIRZA IMRAN BAIG,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD 13(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1177/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Mirza Imran Baig Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward-13(1) [Pan : Apopb7772D] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: None रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Ms.Reema Yadav, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 10/12/2024 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.07.2023 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Learned Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2012-13. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, A Salaried Employee, Having Income Below The Taxable Limits, Sold A Property Along With His Mother & Sisters For A Consideration Of Rs.1,31,10,000/- & Invested The Resulting Capital Gains For Acquiring A Residential House At Hakimpet, Hyderabad For A 2 Consideration Of Rs.26,48,000/-. Notices U/S 142(1) & 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) Were Issued & Served On The Assessee, But The Assessee Neither Appeared Nor Filed Complete Details Before The Assessing Officer. Therefore, The Learned Assessing Officer Passed Best Judgement Assessment, Determining The Long Term Capital Gains At Rs.13,04,050/-.

property along with his mother and sisters for a consideration of Rs.1,31,10,000/- and invested the resulting capital gains for acquiring a residential house at Hakimpet, Hyderabad for a 2 consideration of Rs.26,48,000/-. Notices u/s 142(1) and 148 of the Income tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) were issued and served on the assessee

KAKINADA INFRASTRUCTURE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

u/s 12AA of the Act. In that case, the Hon'ble High\nCourt has held that no doubt, the delay has to be explained with\nproper reasons but it does not mean that every day's delay must\nbe explained. The Court must take a pragmatic view in\nappreciating the reasons attributable to the delay caused to the\nparty