SIVAPOTHULURU VEERAREDDY GADLURU, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

147 of the Act which are for the benefit of the Revenue and not an assessee, an assessee cannot be permitted to convert the reassessment proceedings at his appeal or revision, in disguise, and seek relief in respect of items earlier rejected or claim relief in respect of items not claimed in the original assessment proceedings, unless relatable to escaped

SIVA SHANKER REDDY GANDLURU, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

147 of the Act which are for the benefit of the Revenue and not an assessee, an assessee cannot be permitted to convert the reassessment proceedings at his appeal or revision, in disguise, and seek relief in respect of items earlier rejected or claim relief in respect of items not claimed in the original assessment proceedings, unless relatable to escaped

L.RAJALAKSHMI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1678, 1679 & 1680/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. L.Rajalakshmi, Hyderabad अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Afgpr3011K …..

147 read with section 148 of the Act. 2. This bunch of appeals were heard through video conferencing. 3. All these appeals relating to the same assessee on similar issue were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. ITA No. 1678/CHNY/2014: A.Y. 2007-08 (Assessee’s appeal) 4. The assessee

L.RAJALAKSHMI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1678, 1679 & 1680/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. L.Rajalakshmi, Hyderabad अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Afgpr3011K …..

147 read with section 148 of the Act. 2. This bunch of appeals were heard through video conferencing. 3. All these appeals relating to the same assessee on similar issue were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. ITA No. 1678/CHNY/2014: A.Y. 2007-08 (Assessee’s appeal) 4. The assessee

L.RAJALAKSHMI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1678, 1679 & 1680/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. L.Rajalakshmi, Hyderabad अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Afgpr3011K …..

147 read with section 148 of the Act. 2. This bunch of appeals were heard through video conferencing. 3. All these appeals relating to the same assessee on similar issue were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. ITA No. 1678/CHNY/2014: A.Y. 2007-08 (Assessee’s appeal) 4. The assessee

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. L.RAJALAKSHMI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1678, 1679 & 1680/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. L.Rajalakshmi, Hyderabad अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Afgpr3011K …..

147 read with section 148 of the Act. 2. This bunch of appeals were heard through video conferencing. 3. All these appeals relating to the same assessee on similar issue were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. ITA No. 1678/CHNY/2014: A.Y. 2007-08 (Assessee’s appeal) 4. The assessee

SRUTHI RIEDL,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Sruthi Riedl, Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad Vs. (International [Pan No. Aggpp6953R] Taxation)-2, Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा /Assessee By: Shri H. Srinivasulu, Ar /Revenue By: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit-Dr राजस्‍वजस्‍व द्वारा सुनवाई ई की तारीखीख/Date Of Hearing: 28/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीखीख/Pronouncement On: 08/11/2023

U/s 147 as there was no capital gains chargeable to Tax in AY 2016-17 arising from the JDA dated 04.04.2007 and the JDA dated 10.02.2016 did not alter the factum of handing over of possession to the developer. 10.The Ld A.O/DRP erred in giving a finding that possession of land was given in consequences of second JDA dated

S HARINATH CHOWDARY ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi

section 50C of the Act and it was also held that the finally determined capital gains cannot exceed the capital gains originally assessed in the assessment order. 2.1. In the meantime,, the AO reopened the assessment for the A.Y.2007-08 u/s 147 of the Act by observing that the development agreement was dated 24.7.2003 and some of the terms or Clauses

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

u/s 153C is legally bad in law and prayed for deletion of the addition made. 6.4.5 1 have gone through the assessment order, seized material, submissions of the appellant, remand report and rejoinder of the appellant. It is observed that the material seized during the search, including the sworn statements, indicates substantial evidence that the land sold in the Ameen

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

u/s 153C is legally bad in law and prayed for deletion of the addition made. 6.4.5 1 have gone through the assessment order, seized material, submissions of the appellant, remand report and rejoinder of the appellant. It is observed that the material seized during the search, including the sworn statements, indicates substantial evidence that the land sold in the Ameen

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

u/s 153C is legally bad in law and prayed for deletion of the addition made. 6.4.5 1 have gone through the assessment order, seized material, submissions of the appellant, remand report and rejoinder of the appellant. It is observed that the material seized during the search, including the sworn statements, indicates substantial evidence that the land sold in the Ameen

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

u/s 153C is legally bad in law and prayed for deletion of the addition made. 6.4.5 1 have gone through the assessment order, seized material, submissions of the appellant, remand report and rejoinder of the appellant. It is observed that the material seized during the search, including the sworn statements, indicates substantial evidence that the land sold in the Ameen

HARINATH REDDY DEVIREDDY,HYDERBAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

reassess the income of the appellant and consequential proceeding becomes bad in law. 5. The learned Authorities below ought to have appreciated the fact that, if at all any reasons are recorded for re-opening of assessment amount by the learned assessing officer it may amount to reason to suspect and do not amount to reason to believe

HARINATH REDDY DEVIREDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

reassess the income of the appellant and consequential proceeding becomes bad in law. 5. The learned Authorities below ought to have appreciated the fact that, if at all any reasons are recorded for re-opening of assessment amount by the learned assessing officer it may amount to reason to suspect and do not amount to reason to believe

HARINATH REDDY DEVIREDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

reassess the income of the appellant and consequential proceeding becomes bad in law. 5. The learned Authorities below ought to have appreciated the fact that, if at all any reasons are recorded for re-opening of assessment amount by the learned assessing officer it may amount to reason to suspect and do not amount to reason to believe

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

50C of the Act. We, thus, in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, are of a firm conviction that the nexus between the seized material and the assessee's land transaction stands established on record. 13. Apart from that, we find that the satisfaction note prepared by the AO of the searched person clearly records that the seized material revealed

SHIV KUMAR MITTAL,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of both the assessees are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyassessment Year: 2009-10 Shiv Kumar Mittal, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 8(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Acipm 3813 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Vikash Modi Revenue By: Smt. V. Aparna Date Of Hearing: 04/06/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2019 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This Is An Appeal Of The Assessee For The Ay 2009-10 Against The Order Of Cit(A) – 8, Hyderabad, Dated, 16/02/2018. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, An Individual, Had Sold A Property Situated At Kondapur Grampanchayat, Serilingampally Mandal, Rr District Vide Sale Deed No. 4100/2008 Dated 5Th June, 2008 For A Consideration Of Rs. 15,48,000/-, Whereas The Guideline Value Of The Property As Adopted By The Stamp Valuation Authority Was Rs. 50,56,000/-. Since The Assessee Did Not Offer Any Capital Gains On This Transaction To Tax, Ao Initiated Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuing A Notice U/S 148 On 24/03/2016, Which Was Served On The Assessee By Way Of Affixture At The Last Known Address & Thereafter Notice U/S 142(1) Was Also Issued On 09/05/2016. Since There Was No Reply From The Assessee, A 2 I.T.A. No. 633/Hyd/18 Shiv Kumar Mittal, Hyd..

147 of the Act by issuing a notice u/s 148 on 24/03/2016, which was served on the assessee by way of affixture at the last known address and thereafter notice u/s 142(1) was also issued on 09/05/2016. Since there was no reply from the assessee, a 2 I.T.A. No. 633/Hyd/18 Shiv Kumar Mittal, Hyd.. further notice was issued

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

50C and brought the assessee’s share of the sale consideration to tax. 3. Aggrieved, the legal heir of the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT (A) stating that the assessee has passed away on 14.12.2015 and the notice u/s 148 dated 8.3.2016 issued on a dead person, was an invalid notice and therefore, the assessment order

SANJAY KUMAR AGARWAL ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), HYDERABAD

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

reassessment U/s. 147 is bad in law. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the fact that the notice issued by the Learned A.O. U/s. 148 of the Act is invalid and bad in law, since the approval is required to be obtained from one of them i.e, either from PCIT or from CIT but the same