MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

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

271(1)(c) of the Act. As the Assessing Officer not passed any order for levying penalty, this ground is preposterous and cannot be adjudicated. Dismissed accordingly. 41. In the result ITA No. 1970/Hyd/2011 and 1499/Hyd/2011 are partly allowed for statistical purposes. SA Nos. 83 and 84/ Hyd/2012 are dismissed as infructuous as we have already disposed of the appeals

DAMODAR REDDY KAITI ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

153B the assessee declared business income of Rs.52,000/- u/s 44AD. When queried during the assessment proceedings, the assessee did not state the reasons either for such deviation or for the decrease in business income for the same Period. The assessee also did not State the plots sold were covered and declared u/s 44AD. In any case, the assessee

DAMODAR REDDY KAITI ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

153B the assessee declared business income of Rs.52,000/- u/s 44AD. When queried during the assessment proceedings, the assessee did not state the reasons either for such deviation or for the decrease in business income for the same Period. The assessee also did not State the plots sold were covered and declared u/s 44AD. In any case, the assessee