DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. ICOMM TELE LIMITED, HYERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Icomm Tele Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan – Aaeca 1326Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

set off of losses and pass appropriate assessment orders and re-compute book profits accordingly. The present assessment orders under appeal were passed in consequence of above referred 263 order. 9.1 During the reassessment

ICOMM TELE LIMITED,HYERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Icomm Tele Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan – Aaeca 1326Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

set off of losses and pass appropriate assessment orders and re-compute book profits accordingly. The present assessment orders under appeal were passed in consequence of above referred 263 order. 9.1 During the reassessment

ICOMM TELE LIMITED,HYERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Icomm Tele Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan – Aaeca 1326Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

set off of losses and pass appropriate assessment orders and re-compute book profits accordingly. The present assessment orders under appeal were passed in consequence of above referred 263 order. 9.1 During the reassessment

KARTHIK KUMAR KYATHAM,NIZAMABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, ADILABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is\nallowed

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the\ndepreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for the Assessment Year 2016-17\nand I, hereby, require you to furnish, within 30 days from the service of this notice, a return in\nthe prescribed form for the Assessment Year 2016-17.\nenoleivont doo98238LAXMI PAVANA GAYATHRI MUKKERA\nCIRCLE 1,KARIMNAGAR

DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDRABAD vs. KALPTARU INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal ITA

set off against other losses and\nincurred cash expenses amounting to Rs 2,93,31,831/-. This has resulted in income\namounting to Rs.4,43,18,656/-(Rs 1,49,86,825/- + Rs 2,93,31,831/-) escaping assessment.\nThus, the assessee has failed to disclose truly and fully all material facts concerning its\nincome for the assessment year under

SUKESINI KUMILI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-15(1), HYDERABAD

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the\ndepreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for the Assessment Year 2016-17\nand I, hereby, require you to furnish, within 30 days from the service of this notice, a return in\nthe prescribed form for the Assessment Year 2016-17.\nLAXMI PAVANA GAYATHRI MUKKERA\nCIRCLE 1.KARIMNAGAR\n11. Undisputedly

PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED MINARPALLY,MINARPALLY VILLAGE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIZAMABAD

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the\ndepreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for the Assessment Year 2016-17\nand I, hereby, require you to furnish, within 30 days from the service of this notice, a return in\nthe prescribed form for the Assessment Year 2016-17.\nLAXMI PAVANA GAYATHRI MUKKERA\nCIRCLE 1.KARIMNAGAR\n11. Undisputedly

ANKITJAIN,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in\nterms of our above observation

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the\ndepreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for the Assessment Year 2016-17\nand I, hereby, require you to furnish, within 30 days from the service of this notice, a return in\nthe prescribed form for the Assessment Year 2016-17.\nPage 19 of 28\nLAXMI PAVANA GAYATHRI MUKKERA\nCIRCLE

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the\ndepreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for the Assessment Year 2016-17\nand I, hereby, require you to furnish, within 30 days from the service of this notice, a return in\nthe prescribed form for the Assessment Year 2016-17.\n\nLAXMI PAVANA GAYATHRI MUKKERA\nCIRCLE 1, KARIMNAGAR

AMSRI CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, SECUNDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Amsri Builders Pvt. Vs. The Dy. Cit, Central Ltd., Secunderabad. Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaeca2834R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Amsri Constructions Vs. The Dy. Cit, Central Pvt. Ltd., Secunderabad. Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aafca5309Q (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee By : Shri K.C Devdas Revenue By : Smt. B.K Vishnu Priya Date Of Hearing : 06-03-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 23-05-2018 Order Per P. Madhavi Devi, J.M.:

losses or increase of income and therefore, the reassessment proceedings are not valid. 7. Even on merits, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee did not have funds to carry on its business activities and therefore had borrowed the funds, which were advanced to M/s Amsri Builders Pvt Ltd., as trade advances for land and also

AMSRI BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, SECUNDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Amsri Builders Pvt. Vs. The Dy. Cit, Central Ltd., Secunderabad. Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaeca2834R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Amsri Constructions Vs. The Dy. Cit, Central Pvt. Ltd., Secunderabad. Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aafca5309Q (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee By : Shri K.C Devdas Revenue By : Smt. B.K Vishnu Priya Date Of Hearing : 06-03-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 23-05-2018 Order Per P. Madhavi Devi, J.M.:

losses or increase of income and therefore, the reassessment proceedings are not valid. 7. Even on merits, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee did not have funds to carry on its business activities and therefore had borrowed the funds, which were advanced to M/s Amsri Builders Pvt Ltd., as trade advances for land and also

GAJANAN FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahu(Through Virtual Hearing)

reassessment framed on 16.12.2011 disallowing/adding the short term capital gains of Rs.16,70,179 as not eligible to be set off against long term capital loss

DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(3),, HYDERABAD vs. M/S VISAKA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2006-07 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Vs. M/S Visaka Industries Ltd., Tax, Circle – 3(3), Hyderabad. Secunderabad. Pan – Aaacv 7263 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Visaka Industries Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Secunderabad. Tax, Circle – 3(3), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaacv 7263 K (Appellant) (Respondent)

loss & depreciation of earlier A.Ys which has already been set off against profit of other business. 17. We find that the AO has disallowed the claim u/s 80IB also for the following other reason: i) That the assessee has not filed the copies of the P&L A/c and balance sheet for the Midnapore Unit as certified

M/S VISAKA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(3),, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2006-07 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Vs. M/S Visaka Industries Ltd., Tax, Circle – 3(3), Hyderabad. Secunderabad. Pan – Aaacv 7263 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Visaka Industries Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Secunderabad. Tax, Circle – 3(3), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaacv 7263 K (Appellant) (Respondent)

loss & depreciation of earlier A.Ys which has already been set off against profit of other business. 17. We find that the AO has disallowed the claim u/s 80IB also for the following other reason: i) That the assessee has not filed the copies of the P&L A/c and balance sheet for the Midnapore Unit as certified

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

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is\nallowed

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the\ndepreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for the Assessment Year 2016-17\nand I, hereby, require you to furnish, within 30 days from the service of this notice, a return in\nthe prescribed form for the Assessment Year 2016-17.\nLAXMI PAVANA GAYATHRI MUKKERA\nCIRCLE 1,KARIMNAGAR\n11.\nUndisputedly

BALGURI RAJESHWAR RAO,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 11(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the\ndepreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for the Assessment Year 2016-17\nand I, hereby, require you to furnish, within 30 days from the service of this notice, a return in\nthe prescribed form for the Assessment Year 2016-17.\nENOLEIVONT DOOG8238LAXMI PAVANA GAYATHRI MUKKERA\nCIRCLE 1,KARIMNAGAR

ARKAY ENERGY (RAMESWARM) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the\ndepreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for the Assessment Year 2016-17\nand I, hereby, require you to furnish, within 30 days from the service of this notice, a return in\nthe prescribed form for the Assessment Year 2016-17.\nLAXMI PAVANA GAYATHRI MUKKERA\nCIRCLE 1, KARIMNAGAR\n11. Undisputedly

SHARATH KUMAR REDDY SAREDDY,WANAPARTHY, MAHABUB NAGAR. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, MAHABUBNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1096/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2022-23) Shri Sharath Kumar Reddy Vs. Income Tax Officer Sareddy, Wanaparthy Ward – 1 Mahbubnagar Mahbubnagar Pan:Hpwps0712H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 20/08/2025 आदेश/Order

loss. Thus, the learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the doctrine of real income should be applied. This newly introduction of provisions of the Income Tax Act ensure only real income is chargeable to tax. He has referred to the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Godhra Electricity