VINOD AERUKALA ,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the respective assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Moola Padmaja Vs. Acit,Cc-3(2) 8-1-293/A/74/A 7Th Floor Dwaraka Nagar Colony Aaykar Bhawan Narayanamma Engineering Basheer Bagh College, Raidurg Hyderabad-500 004 Hyderabad-500 008 Pan : Aoipp2482B Assessment Year: 2012-13 Vinod Aerakula Vs Acit,Cc-3(2) B-109, Western Plaza 7Th Floor Hussain Shahwali Darha Aaykar Bhawan Shaikpet, Hyderabad Basheer Bagh Telangana Hyderabad-500 004 Pan : Aoopa5855R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C.Devdas, Ca Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 15.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.02.2023 O R D E R Per Shri Rama Kanta Panda (A.M.): The Above Two Appeals Filed By The Respective Assessees Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 31.03.2022 & 27.3.2022 Respectively Of The Learned Cit(A) (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad Relating To Ay 2012-13. Since Identical Grounds Have Been Raised By The Respective Assessees, Therefore, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

natural justice is offended. On the basis of such proceedings, no penalty could be imposed to the assessee. s) Taking up of penalty proceedings on one limb and finding the assessee guilty of another limb is bad in law. t) The penalty proceedings are distinct from the assessment proceedings. The proceedings for imposition of penalty though emanate from proceedings

SAXON GLOBAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations given hereinabove

natural justice and thus the order of assessment needs to be set aside. 6. Rejection of Transfer Pricing Study a. The authorities below erred in rejecting the transfer pricing study of the assessee company without providing any cogent reasons. under the facts and circumstances of the case. b. The authorities below erred in rejecting the comparables selected by the assessee

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, TIRUPATI vs. PALAKALA GUNASEKHAR, TIRUPATI

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

natural justice are offended. On the basis of such proceedings, no penalty could be imposed on the assessee) taking up of penalty proceedings on one limb and finding the assessee guilty of another limb is bad in law; penalty proceedings are distinct from the assessment proceedings : though proceedings for imposition of penalty emanate from proceedings of assessment, they are independent

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI vs. PALLAM REDDY SREELAKSHMI, TIRUPATI

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

natural justice are offended. On the basis of such proceedings, no penalty could be imposed on the assessee) taking up of penalty proceedings on one limb and finding the assessee guilty of another limb is bad in law; penalty proceedings are distinct from the assessment proceedings : though proceedings for imposition of penalty emanate from proceedings of assessment, they are independent

RASHMI SINGH ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Deviassessment Year: 2010-11

reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer relied upon the statement of one of the Directors of company, Sri Koneru Rajendra Prasad, and Shri Tummala Ranga Rao who marketed the plots and held that the assessee has paid the cash component of Rs.29,85,000/- and he accordingly brought it to tax. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before

VEERA REDDY POSHAM,NALGONDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.No.1830/Hyd

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.Nos.1829 & 1830/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2020-2021 & 2022-2023 Veera Reddy Posham, The Acit, Nalgonda – 508 246 Central Circle-1(1), Vs. Telangana. Hyderabad. Telangana. Pan Aijpp0376P (Applicant) (Respondent) -None- िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By : राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13.03.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

reassessment order is void ab initio and liable to be quashed. C. Violation of Natural Justice  The learned CIT(A) grossly

KAPA SINDHU MITRA,USA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (INT TAXN)-1, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha Gआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.513/Hyd./2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years 2016-2017 Kapa Sindhu Mitra, 20148, Holly Hock Terrace, The Income Tax Officer – Ash Burn, V A, Vs. [Int. Taxn)-1, Hyderabad – 500 004. United States Of America. Pan Azcpk8030D (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By : Sri Sashank Dundu, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 29.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 31.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

justice, we condone the delay of 01 day in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds in the instant appeal : 3 ITA.No.513/Hyd./2024 1. “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order passed by the Assessing Officer [ITO(Int. Taxn

ARCOT AFSAR BEGUM,TADIPATRI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ANANTAPUR

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

Bench: The Tribunal Within The Prescribed Period. It Was Contended That The Delay Is Neither Willful Nor Deliberate But Has Occurred On Account Of Genuine & Bona Fide Reasons. Accordingly, He Prayed For Condonation Of The Delay In The Interest Of Substantial Justice. 3. Per Contra, The Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. Dr") Did Not Raise Any Serious Objection To The Prayer Of The Assessee. 4. We Have Carefully Considered The Submissions Of Both Sides & Perused The Condonation Petition Along With The Affidavit Placed On Record. On Perusal Of The Same, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Has Shown A Reasonable & Bona Fide Cause For The Delay In Filing The Appeal. It Is Well Settled That When Substantial Justice & Technical Considerations Are Pitted Against Each Other, The Cause Of Substantial Justice Deserves To Be Preferred. In View Of The Above Facts & Circumstances & There Being No Serious Objection From The Revenue, We Condone The Delay Of 95 Days In Filing Of The Appeal. Accordingly, The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication On Merits. 5. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

natural justice. ITA No.1134/Hyd/2025 | 4 5. Section 115BBE Taxation Unjustified in the Absence of Valid Addition under Section 69A: The AO further erred in subjecting the said addition of Rs.29,92,000 to special rate of taxation under Section 115BBE in the rectification order dated 26.09.2023. As the very basis of addition under Section 69A is legally untenable, the consequential

MAMATHA GUBBALA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-15(1), HYDERABAD

natural justice so that he can produce the necessary evidences/documents in order to help the Ld. AO to arrive at correct and real income. The Ld. AO is hereby directed to make all necessary enquiries in order to verify the documents submitted by the appellant if deemed necessary by him. 6.1.7. The appellant is also directed to appear before

CANARA SECURITIES LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2010-11 Canara Securities Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hydereabad. Income-Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pan – Aaacc8283G Hyderabad. Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Ramkishore Jhawar Revenue By: Shri Nilanjan Dey Date Of Hearing: 08/05/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 03/07/2019 O R D E R

reassessment proceedings, the AO observed that the assessee is involved in transaction involving in CCM to absorb contrived losses from the other parties and AO came to the conclusion with the following observations in his order, which is reproduced below: "5.2 In this regard the details of the client code modification in assessee's account during FY 2009-10 were

VEERA REDDY POSHAM,NALGONDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita.Nos.1829 & 1830/Hyd/2025

reassessment order is void ab initio and liable to be quashed. C. Violation of Natural Justice • The learned CIT(A) grossly

THE PRAKASAM DISTRISET POLICE WELFARE ASSOCIATION,ONGOLE vs. ITO., WARD-1, ONGOLE

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

natural justice, as adequate opportunity was not provided to verify and correct the erroneous data despite specific explanations being furnished, and the submissions made were disregarded without cogent reasoning 3. Perverse finding and irrelevant considerations The CIT(A) wrongly relied on alleged inability to reconcile sales turnover to cash deposits, which is irrelevant to the present issue. The addition

VENKATARAMA SATYA SURYA NARAYANA MURTHY RAJU SAGI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-6(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.788/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2018-19) Shri Venkatarama Satya Surya Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-6(1), Hyderabad. Narayana Murthy Raju Sagi, Hyderabad. Pan:Athps0867M (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram & Shri P. Vinod, Advocates रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Narender Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 23/07/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 08/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M. : This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Venkatarama Satya Surya Narayana Murthy Raju Sagi (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 30.04.2025 For The A.Y. 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

natural justice. It was further submitted that the disallowance has been made without properly examining the merits, and hence the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication, granting the assessee an opportunity to present his case. ITA No.788/Hyd/2025 4 6. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) opposed the request for remand

ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD vs. NEW CLUB, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

reassessment proceedings, the Ld. AO noticed that the assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs.1,94,38,894/- in its bank account but had not declared the source of such deposits by filing the return of income along with supporting documentary evidence. The Ld. AO further observed that no documentary evidence such as names of persons from whom cash were

HARINATH REDDY DEVIREDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

natural justice before dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The learned Authorities below ought to have appreciated the fact that, the order of re-assessment passed under section 147 of the Act is bad in law and void-ab-intio as the mandatory conditions to invoke the provision of section

HARINATH REDDY DEVIREDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

natural justice before dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The learned Authorities below ought to have appreciated the fact that, the order of re-assessment passed under section 147 of the Act is bad in law and void-ab-intio as the mandatory conditions to invoke the provision of section

HARINATH REDDY DEVIREDDY,HYDERBAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

natural justice before dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The learned Authorities below ought to have appreciated the fact that, the order of re-assessment passed under section 147 of the Act is bad in law and void-ab-intio as the mandatory conditions to invoke the provision of section

RAMESH BABU BEJJALA,KOTHAGUDEM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KOTHAGUDEM

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

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

natural justice and fair play. 6. The learned authorities below erred in initiating and not adjudicating the penalty proceedings under Sections 271(1)(c) and 271F of the Act, despite the absence of any concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The appellant had a bona fide explanation, duly supported by documentation, and the initial non-filing of return