DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. TRACKS & TOWERS INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED(PART IX), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

147 or 263 proceedings are pending. The order u/s. 143(1) is placed at pages 211-222 of paper book volume-2. Referring to pages 223-227 of the paper book volume-2, he submitted that the AO in the order passed u/s. 143(3) for AY 2020-21 has allowed the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA. Referring

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD vs. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATI RAJ, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue and cross- objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

Section 148 of the Act by the non-jurisdictional officer, i.e., ITO, Ward–8(1), Hyderabad, is bad in law and liable to be quashed. “5.3 I am totally in agreement with the contentions of the appellant that the non-jurisdictional Assessing officer has no powers to initiate proceedings u/s 147 of the Act and issue notice u/s

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

u/s 139(1) or 139(5) of the Act.\niii.\nWhether on the facts and circumstances of the case,\nand in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in not holding that the\nProvisions of sections 153A to 153C cannot be\ninterpreted to be further innings for AO and/or assessee\nbeyond provisions of sections 139, 147 and 263, as\nsuch

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result appeals filed by the Revenue\nITA

u/s 139(1) or 139(5) of the Act.\niii.\nWhether on the facts and circumstances of the case,\nand in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in not holding that the\nProvisions of sections 153A to 153C cannot be\ninterpreted to be further innings for AO and/or assessee\nbeyond provisions of sections 139, 147 and 263, as\nsuch

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), HYDERBAD vs. SEW INFRASTUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

u/s 139(1) or 139(5) of the Act.\n\niii.\nWhether on the facts and circumstances of the case,\nand in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in not holding that the\nProvisions of sections 153A to 153C cannot be\ninterpreted to be further innings for AO and/or assessee\nbeyond provisions of sections 139, 147 and 263, as\nsuch

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

reassess such income for such assessment\nyear. Further, Section 147 makes it very clear that in\norder to invoke provisions of Section 147 of the Act, there\nshould be income which has escaped assessment, and such\nescapement should be based on fresh tangible material\nwhich comes to the possession of the AO subsequent to the\ncompletion of the original assessment

SANGHI TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERBAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

u/s 139(1), despite being a company, TDS credits under sections 194A and 194C aggregating over Rs. 3.2 crores and 8 Sanghi Textiles Privarte Limited vs. ITO time deposits of Rs. 19.54 lakhs were reflected in the 26AS statement, but remained unaccounted. The information clearly constitutes "tangible material" justifying reopening as held in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD vs. COASTAL PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, the C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153 . Therefore, an assessment completed u/s 143 (3) r.w.s. 153 A cannot fall in the ambit of section 147 and 148. A special provision prevails over the general provision. Section 153A specially excludes the operation of section 147 and the assessment cannot be reopened. Thus, the action

RAGHU SATYANARYANA KOLLU,KODAD vs. ITO., WARD-1, SURYAPET

In the result, both the captioned appeals are allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

reassessment proceedings for the AY 2013-14. 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi erred in upholding the order passed by the learned AO, National Faceless Assessment Centre u/s 147 rws 144 & 1448 of the Act for the AY 2013-14 which is erroneous

RAGHU SATYANARYANA KOLLU,KODAD vs. ITO., WARD-1, SURYAPET

In the result, both the captioned appeals are allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

reassessment proceedings for the AY 2013-14. 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi erred in upholding the order passed by the learned AO, National Faceless Assessment Centre u/s 147 rws 144 & 1448 of the Act for the AY 2013-14 which is erroneous

PRABHAKAR REDDY BASIREDDY, NALGONDA vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1) , HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

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

139, after the expiry of one month from the date on which he was served with a notice under subsection (1) of section 142 or sub-section (2) of section 115WE or subsection (2) of section 143 or after the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier; (b) where he has made no such return, after the expiry

PRABHAKAR REDDY BASIREDDY, NALGONDA vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

139, after the expiry of one month from the date on which he was served with a notice under subsection (1) of section 142 or sub-section (2) of section 115WE or subsection (2) of section 143 or after the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier; (b) where he has made no such return, after the expiry

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

u/s 153C for A.Ys 2000-2001 to 2005-06. The Judgment pertains to pre amended Section 153C. However, there is an amendment to Section 153C w.e.f 1-10-2014 which reads as under: ITA Nos.34 to 36/Hyd/2021 [(1)] [Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer

ORBIT VENTURES,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

u/s 153C for A.Ys 2000-2001 to 2005-06. The Judgment pertains to pre amended Section 153C. However, there is an amendment to Section 153C w.e.f 1-10-2014 which reads as under: ITA Nos.34 to 36/Hyd/2021 [(1)] [Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer

ORBIT VENTURES,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

u/s 153C for A.Ys 2000-2001 to 2005-06. The Judgment pertains to pre amended Section 153C. However, there is an amendment to Section 153C w.e.f 1-10-2014 which reads as under: ITA Nos.34 to 36/Hyd/2021 [(1)] [Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

u/s 153C for A.Ys 2000-2001 to 2005-06. The Judgment pertains to pre amended Section 153C. However, there is an amendment to Section 153C w.e.f 1-10-2014 which reads as under: ITA Nos.34 to 36/Hyd/2021 [(1)] [Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

u/s 153C for A.Ys 2000-2001 to 2005-06. The Judgment pertains to pre amended Section 153C. However, there is an amendment to Section 153C w.e.f 1-10-2014 which reads as under: ITA Nos.34 to 36/Hyd/2021 [(1)] [Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer

ORBIT VENTURES,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

u/s 153C for A.Ys 2000-2001 to 2005-06. The Judgment pertains to pre amended Section 153C. However, there is an amendment to Section 153C w.e.f 1-10-2014 which reads as under: ITA Nos.34 to 36/Hyd/2021 [(1)] [Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer