RAMA MOHAN SOMA,ANANTAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, HINDUPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Accounant Member Assessment Year: 2012-13 Rama Mohan Soma, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, H.No.12-274-3, Bypass Ward – 1, Road, Kadiri, Anantapur, Hindupur. Andhra Pradesh – 515591. Pan : Aocps8172D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr.Ar. Date Of Hearing: 02.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.05.2024 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y. 2012-13 Arises From Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dt.27.12.2023 Invoking Proceedings Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”). 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Read As Under :

natural justice and hence the impugned order is liable for quashed. 2 6. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi erred in dismissing the ground no.5 of appeal without appreciating the fact that the Learned Assessing Officer has quoted the wrong assessment year in the demand notice issued u/s 156 of the Act which

SHIVA RANJANI VEJJA ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-12(2) , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

nature of activity and residential address the computer automatically selects the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer, therefore, the returns were uploaded to the Assessing Officer Ward-10(4), Hyderabad. Considering the objections raised the learned CIT sought remand report from the Assessing Officer. The remand report which is reproduced at page 4,5 and 6 of the CIT(A) order

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

natural justice so that he can produce the\nnecessary evidences/documents in order to help the Ld. AO to arrive\nat correct and real income. The Ld. AO is hereby directed to make all\nnecessary enquiries in order to verify the documents submitted by the\nappellant if deemed necessary by him.\n6.1.7. The appellant is also directed to appear before

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

SYED GULAM MOHIUDDIN,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.136/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Syed Gulam Vs. Income Tax Officer Mohiuddin (International Taxation)-1 Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Decpm0365H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shiva Sewak, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 12.01.2023 Of The Learned Assessing Officer (International Taxation-1), Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Read As Under: “1. The Final Assessment Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Int Taxn)-1,Hyd (Herein After Referred To As 'Ao) Is Erroneous Both On Facts & In Law To The Extent The Order Is Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Appellant.

justice. 10. 11. 12. The Ld. A.O has erred in reopening the assessment without recording the reasons and without communicating the reasons for reopening which is incorrect and unjustified. 11. The Ld. A.O made a huge addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on the basis of loose sheets those of which have been made based on the culled out seized

RATNA INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2012-13 Ratna Infrastructure Projects Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward –3(3), Private Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aadcr5836P. (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri B. Balakrishna, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.02.2025

reassessment proceedings amounting to Rs.273,02,94,670/-. 5. The learned Commissioner ought to have appreciated that notice u/s 148 is issued on account of a letter from ADIT Kolkata, in respect of a transaction amounting to Rs.5,64,94,670/- and further in respect of transaction of Rs.267,38,00,000/-on merely a TEP. As there

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

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

natural justice.\n14. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the\ndisallowance was made u/s 36(1)(vii) of the Act, however the\nimpairment loss is claimable u/s 37(1) of the Act as business\nexpense incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of\nbusiness, as it is a mandatory accounting practice required by\nlaw

LANCO ENTERPRISE PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD (ERSTWHILE DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1)), HYDERABAD ,, HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA Nos. 236 & 237/Hyd/2023 are allowed for statistical purposes and ITA No

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

147 of the Act are taken up in the appellant's case only to verify the disallowability of the claim made u/s 36(1 )(iii) of the Act which is not permissible as per the provisions of I.T Act,1961. (h) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the reassessment is invalid on the ground that there

LANCO ENTERPRISE PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD (ERSTWHILE DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA Nos. 236 & 237/Hyd/2023 are allowed for statistical purposes and ITA No

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

147 of the Act are taken up in the appellant's case only to verify the disallowability of the claim made u/s 36(1 )(iii) of the Act which is not permissible as per the provisions of I.T Act,1961. (h) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the reassessment is invalid on the ground that there

LANCO ENTERPRISE PRIVATE LIMITED ,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD (ERSTWHILE DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1)), HYDERABAD ,, HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA Nos. 236 & 237/Hyd/2023 are allowed for statistical purposes and ITA No

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

147 of the Act are taken up in the appellant's case only to verify the disallowability of the claim made u/s 36(1 )(iii) of the Act which is not permissible as per the provisions of I.T Act,1961. (h) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the reassessment is invalid on the ground that there

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

Bench: Us:

natural justice as the appellant was not provided with a sufficient and proper opportunity to present their case. The appellant was deprived of the opportunity to substantiate the facts and provide relevant documentary evidence, which makes the order unsustainable in law. 3. The PCIT's findings that the original assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests

SANJEEV KUMAR NALAM,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.669/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Sanjeev Kumar Nalam Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward – 1 Pan:Avdpn0497L Adilabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rehman, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 03/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

justice.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the order of the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) passed for Assessment Year 2017-18 under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(“the Act”), dated 31.05.2023. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal

LATE RAJASEKHAR CHELIKANI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(2), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

natural justice will be not met if a fresh opportunity is not accorded in this case. In view of this, the assessments for the A.Ys i.e. 2011-12 to, 2014-15, 2016-17 & 2017-18 are set aside for fresh consideration by the AO. Since the assessments are set aside the grounds of appeal are not being separately adjudicated

KILARU VENKATA SATISH,KRISHNA DIST vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Us), Which Reads As Under:

natural justice. 2. Without prejudice to the above, the Id. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition made by the AO of Rs.50,00,000 as unexplained credit u/s.68 of the Act. The Id. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the evidence filed and thereby erred in confirming the addition without giving sufficient opportunity. 3. Any other ground that

KINETA GLOBAL LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.800/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Kineta Global Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Hyderabad. Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Pan: Aacck7944A Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Sri S. Venkateswarlu, Tax Consultant रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/11/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 19/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Company Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 03/03/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”) Dated 21/02/2024 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. The Assessee Company

natural justice are not followed in terms of not looking into the records. 5. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is to be held as bad in law as the Ld. CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking order in terms of section 250(6) of the Act. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend

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:

147 was invalid in law as: a) The conditions precedent for assumption of jurisdiction were not satisfied; b) There was no tangible material linking any income escapement to the appellant; c) The notice u/s 148 was issued mechanically based only on search information of other entities (M/s Ira Group) without independent application of mind; and d) Accordingly, the reassessment order

LATE RAJASEKHAR CHELIKANI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

natural justice and procedural law, 3. The Assessing Officer erred in completing the assessment without making an effort to identify or bring the legal heirs of the deceased assessee on record as mandated under Section 159 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate this legal requirement.” 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his return

LATE RAJASEKHAR CHELIKANI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRLCE 3(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

natural justice and procedural law, 3. The Assessing Officer erred in completing the assessment without making an effort to identify or bring the legal heirs of the deceased assessee on record as mandated under Section 159 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate this legal requirement.” 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his return