DEEPIKA INFRATECH PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

40A(3) amounting to Rs.1,73,00,000/-. 4.The learned Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals)-II, erred in confirming Penalty U/s.271(1)(c ) regarding disallowance of hire charges on Tractors, u/s 40(a)(ia) amounting to Rs.50,85,000/-. 11.1 The assessee has also raised the following additional ground relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, HYDERABAD vs. M/S DEEPIKA INFRATECH PVT LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

40A(3) amounting to Rs.1,73,00,000/-. 4.The learned Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals)-II, erred in confirming Penalty U/s.271(1)(c ) regarding disallowance of hire charges on Tractors, u/s 40(a)(ia) amounting to Rs.50,85,000/-. 11.1 The assessee has also raised the following additional ground relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

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

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

2)\nof Act.\n7. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the AO has not\nrecorded his satisfaction about initiation of penalty proceedings\nu/s 271D of the Act\n8. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that, as per the\nprovisions of section 271, a proper satisfaction must be recorded\nto initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271D instead

DEMI REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes on the above terms

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

penalty u/s 234B of the Act by observing that the cash seized should have been adjusted against the self assessment tax payable with the return of income. Thus, considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that interest charged u/s 234B of the Act in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, deserves

SPECTRA EQUIPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1),, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaassessment Year: 2017-18 Spectra Equipment Private Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan No.Aaccs8677C. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Akanksha, C.A. For Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Narmada, Cit-Dr For Shri Madan Mohan Meena, Sr.D.R. Date Of Hearing: 11.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.12.2024

40A(3) upon themselves. Hence, realisation of cash from them is illogical and appears to be fabricated by the appellant in its books of accounts. 5.6. On examination of the Balance Sheet of the appellant, it is seen that Trade receivables on 31.12.2016 is Rs. 2,18,73,573 and that as on 31.03.2017 is Rs 2

M/S ELEM INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is also initiated against the appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the assessed income is enhanced to the extent of Rs. 58,46,780/-. Show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued for the reasons recorded

M/S ELEM INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is also initiated against the appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the assessed income is enhanced to the extent of Rs. 58,46,780/-. Show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued for the reasons recorded

M/S ELEM INVESTMENT(P)LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. THE DICT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is also initiated against the appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the assessed income is enhanced to the extent of Rs. 58,46,780/-. Show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued for the reasons recorded

M/S ELEM INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is also initiated against the appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the assessed income is enhanced to the extent of Rs. 58,46,780/-. Show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued for the reasons recorded

M/S HIGHGRACE INVESTEMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is also initiated against the appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the assessed income is enhanced to the extent of Rs. 58,46,780/-. Show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued for the reasons recorded

M/S HIGHGRACE INVESTEMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is also initiated against the appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the assessed income is enhanced to the extent of Rs. 58,46,780/-. Show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued for the reasons recorded

M/S HIGH GRACE INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is also initiated against the appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the assessed income is enhanced to the extent of Rs. 58,46,780/-. Show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued for the reasons recorded

M/S HIGHGRACE INVESTMENTS PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is also initiated against the appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the assessed income is enhanced to the extent of Rs. 58,46,780/-. Show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued for the reasons recorded

M/S VECYES INVESTEMENT PVT LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is also initiated against the appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the assessed income is enhanced to the extent of Rs. 58,46,780/-. Show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued for the reasons recorded

M/S FINCITY INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is also initiated against the appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the assessed income is enhanced to the extent of Rs. 58,46,780/-. Show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued for the reasons recorded

M/S FINCITY INVESTMENTS PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is also initiated against the appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the assessed income is enhanced to the extent of Rs. 58,46,780/-. Show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued for the reasons recorded

M/S FINCITY INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is also initiated against the appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the assessed income is enhanced to the extent of Rs. 58,46,780/-. Show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued for the reasons recorded

M/S FINCITY INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is also initiated against the appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the assessed income is enhanced to the extent of Rs. 58,46,780/-. Show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued for the reasons recorded