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

In the result, all the appeals of assessees are dismissed

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

69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D, if such income is not covered under clause (a), the income-tax payable shall be the aggregate of— ii) the amount of income-tax with which the assessee would have been chargeable had his total income been reduced by the amount of income referred to in clause N.] (2) Notwithstanding anything contained

SUPREME AGRO,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3 (1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessees are dismissed

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

69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D, if such income is not covered under clause (a), the income-tax payable shall be the aggregate of— ii) the amount of income-tax with which the assessee would have been chargeable had his total income been reduced by the amount of income referred to in clause N.] (2) Notwithstanding anything contained

VISHAL JAIN,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Vishal Jain, Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle – 3(4), Pan : Aympj0559M. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Ms. Reema Yadav. Date Of Hearing: 17.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.01.2023

69A and taxability u/s 115BBE and therefore, the applicability of the Section 115BBE(1)(b) is valid. In view of the above discussion, the ground no.4 and 7 are dismissed. With regard to ground no. 6, the appellant contended that the Assessing Officer erred in not giving the notice u/s. 153A. It is relevant to note that the Section 153A

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

69A of the Income-tax\nAct, 1961, be deleted in its entirety;\nThe application of Section 115BBE and the resulting demand of\nRs.20,33,928 be set aside;\nThe return of income filed under Section 44AD may be accepted as\ncorrectly and lawfully declared;\nAny other relief deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of\nthe case

SRI EDUPAYALA VANA DURGA BHAVANI,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SANGAREDDY

Bench: Us:

reassessment order, if passed, would result in a baseless and unwarranted demand, causing undue hardship to the appellant.” 3 Sri Edupayala Vana Durga Bhavani 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee, an AOP, had not filed its return of income for the subject year, i.e., A.Y. 2016-17. The A.O., based on information that the assessee had during the subject year made

VASUKI KATAKAM,KURNOOL vs. ITO., WARD-1, KURNOOL

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is\nallowed

69A", "Section 139(1)", "Section 149(1)(b)", "Section 147", "Section 151A", "Section 144B" ], "issues": "Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated

NAVDURGA TRANSPORT COMPANY,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1), HYDERABAD

Appeal is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

reassessment proceedings, we are 7 ITA 218 and 219/Hyd/2025 Navadurga Transport Company vs. ITO unable to persuade ourselves to accept the same. As observed by the CIT(A) and rightly so, as the AO at the stage of initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Act is only required to have some material available with him, based on which

NAVDURGA TRANSPORT COMPANY,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1), HYDERABAD

Appeal is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

reassessment proceedings, we are 7 ITA 218 and 219/Hyd/2025 Navadurga Transport Company vs. ITO unable to persuade ourselves to accept the same. As observed by the CIT(A) and rightly so, as the AO at the stage of initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Act is only required to have some material available with him, based on which

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

Section 69A, the burden lies on the Revenue to establish the existence of unexplained "money" owned by the assessee. In the present case, the addition arose solely from misreported third-party data, not from any independent finding of unaccounted money. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, OR modify the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing

KONDAL REDDY ANUMULA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

reassess taking into consideration other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by AO in exercise of powers under sections 147/148, subject to fulfilment of the conditions envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148, and these powers are saved." 16. In this view of the matter and considering the facts and circumstances of the case

KONDAL REDDY ANUMULA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

reassess taking into consideration other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by AO in exercise of powers under sections 147/148, subject to fulfilment of the conditions envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148, and these powers are saved." 16. In this view of the matter and considering the facts and circumstances of the case

KONDAL REDDY ANUMULA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

reassess taking into consideration other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by AO in exercise of powers under sections 147/148, subject to fulfilment of the conditions envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148, and these powers are saved." 16. In this view of the matter and considering the facts and circumstances of the case

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NELLORE vs. VENKATA RAMANAMMA SAKAMURI, NELLORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue being devoid and bereft of any substance is dismissed

Bench: Us:

69A and taxed it at higher rates under Section 115BBE. The case was scrutinized due to reported cash deposits. A notice under Section 148A(b) was issued with insufficient statutory notice time, violating procedural requirements. Subsequently, a notice under Section 148 was issued on 07.04.2022, beyond the permissible three-year limit under Section 149. Approval for this notice

LAXMI VENKATA KRISHNA RICE CORPORATION,NALGONDA vs. ITO, WARD-1, SURYAPET

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

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

69A of the Act. Thereafter, the AO vide his order passed under section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 16/03/2023 determined the income of the assessee firm at Rs.65,50,000/-. 6. Aggrieved the assessee firm carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but without success. 7. The assessee firm being aggrieved with the order

SATYAM GUPTA ARAVEETI,PRAKASHAM DISTRICT vs. ITO, WARD-1, ONGOLE

reassessment notice would be considered time barred if issued beyond standard 3-year period as per section 148. Hence 148 notice is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 4. The Ld commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition made u/s 69A

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)

69A. The CIT(A) vaguely stated that the cited cases are "distinguishable on facts" without providing any reasoned analysis as to how the fundamental legal principle laid down in those judgments— which is squarely applicable to the appellant's case—was in fact distinguished. b) The action of the CIT(A) is a gross error because the essence

PEDAVEETI SWATHI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD 9(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1785/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2016-17) Pedaveeti Swathi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward-9(1), Pan: Fugps2126J Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 04/03/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 03/06/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 27/02/2024 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order Of The Cit(A) On The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

section 148 of the Act which is contrary to the procedure prescribed under the E-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022, dt.29.03.2022. notice u/s 148 of the IT Act dated: 02.04.2022 by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO). 5. The learned AO erred in not following the mandatory procedure laid down u/s 148A (a)-(d) before issuance of notice

RAMESH SISTLA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

69A of the Act\nand Rs.1,20,81,000/- under section 68 of the Act, thereby\ndetermining the total income at Rs.13,00,94,230/-.\n\n5.\nAggrieved by the assessment order of the Ld. AO, the\nassessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, since the\nassessee repeatedly sought adjournments in response to notices\nissued

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the remaining appeals filed by the assessees (at Sl

69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and unexplained investment under Section 69 of the Act, and also upheld the treatment of Rs.40,68,000/- under Section 115BBE of the Act. 8. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 9. The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri M. V. Prasad