ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-15(1)., HYDERABAD vs. SRIDHAR REDDY JAGAN NAGARI SATYA., HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed”

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year:2012-13 Sridhar Reddy Jagan Vs. Dy. C.I.T. Nagari Satya, Circle 15(1) Secunderabad Hyderabad Pan:Adapj3782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year:2012-13 A.C.I.T. Vs. Sridhar Reddy Jagan Circle 15(1) Nagari Satya, Hyderabad Secunderabad Pan:Adapj3782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri P. Murali Mohan, Ca Revenue By: Sri Rajendra Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 08/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M These Are Cross Appeals. The First One Is Filed By The Assessee & The 2Nd One Is Filed By The Revenue & Are Directed Against The Order Dated 27.3.2017 Cit (A)-7, Hyderabad Relating To The A.Y 2012-13. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

reassessment proceedings were based on assumption of jurisdiction through the issue of notice under section 143 (2) of the Act, which was not validly served on the assessee, we hold that the assessing officer was patently wrong in completing the assessment without effecting the service of notice in accordance with section 282

SRIDHAR REDDY JAGAN NAGARI SATYA.,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-15(1)., HYDERABAD.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed”

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year:2012-13 Sridhar Reddy Jagan Vs. Dy. C.I.T. Nagari Satya, Circle 15(1) Secunderabad Hyderabad Pan:Adapj3782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year:2012-13 A.C.I.T. Vs. Sridhar Reddy Jagan Circle 15(1) Nagari Satya, Hyderabad Secunderabad Pan:Adapj3782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri P. Murali Mohan, Ca Revenue By: Sri Rajendra Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 08/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M These Are Cross Appeals. The First One Is Filed By The Assessee & The 2Nd One Is Filed By The Revenue & Are Directed Against The Order Dated 27.3.2017 Cit (A)-7, Hyderabad Relating To The A.Y 2012-13. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

reassessment proceedings were based on assumption of jurisdiction through the issue of notice under section 143 (2) of the Act, which was not validly served on the assessee, we hold that the assessing officer was patently wrong in completing the assessment without effecting the service of notice in accordance with section 282

B.M. LAND DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS, ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(4),, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

282 provides that the Board may make rules providing for the addresses (including the address for electronic mail or electronic mail message) to which the communication referred to in sub-section (1) may be delivered or transmitted to the person therein named. Pursuant to this provision, rule 127 has been inserted by the IT (Eighteenth Amendment) Rules, 2015 w.e.f

DESU ENTERPRISES,ONGOLE vs. ITO., WARD-1, ONGOLE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

reassessment proceedings would be\ngoverned by the law prevailing prior to 01.04.2021.\n9.\nWe are unable to accept the aforesaid contention of the Revenue. On\nperusal of the above e-mail communication by the revenue, we find that the\ntime of sending of the email is clearly mentioned as 03:53:49 AM on\n01.04.2021, and the time of delivery

SOUBHAGYA PROJECTS, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-7(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

reassessment proceedings by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act. 13. Consequently, the impugned order of the ITAT annulling the assessments for AY 2001-02 to 2004-05 cannot be said to be erroneous”. :- 12 -: 10.2.i. Similar principles were also laid down in the case of in the case of KLM Royal Dutch Airlines Vs. Asst. Director

THALLA SRISAILAM GOUD,IBRAHIMPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

reassessment proceedings would be governed by the law prevailing prior to 01.04.2021. ITA Nos.549 & 589/Hyd/2024 8 9. We are unable to accept the aforesaid contention of the Revenue. On perusal of the above e-mail communication by the revenue, we find that the time of sending of the email is clearly mentioned

RR MARKETING,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

reassessment proceedings under section 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AY 2015-16, based on information about substantial financial transactions and the assessee's failure to file a return. The AO made additions of Rs. 6,94,004 on account of undisclosed discount receipts and Rs. 518 as commission. The CIT(A) upheld these additions

LATE S.SURESH LEGAL HEIR BY S.MAHESH ,SECUNDRABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-15(1), HYDERABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed”

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Deviassessment Year: 2009-10

282 of the IT Act, therefore, ought to have held the order as invalid order. 3. The learned CIT (A) ought to have appreciated that the notice dated 8.3.2016 is served in the name of a dead person, therefore, ought to have held that the same is an invalid notice, further erred in not holding the order as an invalid

PEDA SUBBA RAO UNNAM,ADDANKI vs. ITO , WARD-1, ONGOLE

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

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with rule 127 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 5. That the impugned notice u/s. 148 of the Act dt. 09-04-2022 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (ITO, Ward-1, Ongole) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer is bad-in-law, as the same was issued without following the automated allocation

INDUR AVENUES AND FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,NIZAMABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

282/-. AO completed the assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 28.12.2019 and determined total income at Rs.2,02,80,111/- by making additions towards finance charges, disallowance u/s 14A of the Act and estimated interest on redeemable debentures. 16. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT

INDUR DEVELOPERS AND AGENCIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,VIJAYAWADA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

282/-. AO completed the assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 28.12.2019 and determined total income at Rs.2,02,80,111/- by making additions towards finance charges, disallowance u/s 14A of the Act and estimated interest on redeemable debentures. 16. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT

INDUR AVENUES AND FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,NIZAMABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

282/-. AO completed the assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 28.12.2019 and determined total income at Rs.2,02,80,111/- by making additions towards finance charges, disallowance u/s 14A of the Act and estimated interest on redeemable debentures. 16. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT

NEELAKANTA REDDY MUDDAM ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERS ,WARD-11(1) , HYDERABAD

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Neelakanta Reddy Muddam V Ito,Ward-11(1) F.No.202, 2Nd Floor S. Room No.1006, Kunapa Reddy’S Castle Singature Towers Towers, Anjaneya Nagar, Opp. Botanical Garden Moosapet, Kothaguda Hyderabad-522 002 Hyderabad-500 084

section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Consequently, the assumption of jurisdiction for making the impugned reassessment is void

MURARI SUBHA RAO,SECUNDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-13(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2010-11 (Through Video Conference) Murari Subba Rao, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Secunderabad. Ward – 13(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aadpm 2285N (Appellant) (Respondent)

282 of the Act on the wrong address, c) no tangible material was available with the ld. AO, which would enable the ld. AO to form a belief that the income of the assessee had escaped assessment, d) reassessment was made based on the borrowed satisfaction and that there was no independent application of mind from the side

SUDHIR KUMAR.D.SHAH - HUF,HYDERABAD vs. DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhappellant Respondent

282) (Andhra Pradesh) and the case of CIT-III Vs. Sri Rao Subba Rao (HUF) in ITTA No.254 of 2014, dt.15- 04-2014 and held that the assumption of jurisdiction without having recorded the reasons in the case of searched person is invalid in Sri Padmavathi Venkateswara Constructions in ITA No.47/Viz/2019 dated 26-06-2019. For the sake of clarity

SUDHIR KUMAR.D.SHAH - HUF,HYDERABAD vs. DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhappellant Respondent

282) (Andhra Pradesh) and the case of CIT-III Vs. Sri Rao Subba Rao (HUF) in ITTA No.254 of 2014, dt.15- 04-2014 and held that the assumption of jurisdiction without having recorded the reasons in the case of searched person is invalid in Sri Padmavathi Venkateswara Constructions in ITA No.47/Viz/2019 dated 26-06-2019. For the sake of clarity

SUDHIR KUMAR.D.SHAH - HUF,HYDERABAD vs. DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhappellant Respondent

282) (Andhra Pradesh) and the case of CIT-III Vs. Sri Rao Subba Rao (HUF) in ITTA No.254 of 2014, dt.15- 04-2014 and held that the assumption of jurisdiction without having recorded the reasons in the case of searched person is invalid in Sri Padmavathi Venkateswara Constructions in ITA No.47/Viz/2019 dated 26-06-2019. For the sake of clarity

SUDHIR KUMAR.D.SHAH - HUF,HYDERABAD vs. DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhappellant Respondent

282) (Andhra Pradesh) and the case of CIT-III Vs. Sri Rao Subba Rao (HUF) in ITTA No.254 of 2014, dt.15- 04-2014 and held that the assumption of jurisdiction without having recorded the reasons in the case of searched person is invalid in Sri Padmavathi Venkateswara Constructions in ITA No.47/Viz/2019 dated 26-06-2019. For the sake of clarity

SUDHIR KUMAR.D.SHAH - HUF,HYDERABAD vs. DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhappellant Respondent

282) (Andhra Pradesh) and the case of CIT-III Vs. Sri Rao Subba Rao (HUF) in ITTA No.254 of 2014, dt.15- 04-2014 and held that the assumption of jurisdiction without having recorded the reasons in the case of searched person is invalid in Sri Padmavathi Venkateswara Constructions in ITA No.47/Viz/2019 dated 26-06-2019. For the sake of clarity