DEEPALI KAPOOR,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-12(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1097/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2022-23) Ms. Deepali Kapoor Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 12 (1) Pan:Annpk2904M Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Pawan Kumar Chakrapani राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri R. Kumaran, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Ms. Deepali Kapoor (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 10.06.2025 For The A.Y 2022-23. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Impugned Order Of The Learned Authorities Below In So Far As It Is Against The Appellant Is Opposed To Law, Weight Of Page 1 Of 7

68 of the Act. Thus, the assessment was completed by Ld. AO under section 143(3) read with section 144B

THATI SATISH KUMAR,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(12), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

68 and 69 of the Act, and its sustainability, and the other one is application of higher rate of tax in terms of Section 115BBE of the Act. If the assessee succeeds in his appeal filed against the assessment order passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

68 in respect\nof alleged bogus transactions with M/s. Lakshin Infradev Pvt. Ltd: Rs.\n1,29,91,000/-, determined he income of the assessee company vide his\norder passed under section 143(3) r.w.s 144B

DILEEP KUMAR SAKAMURI CHENCHU VENKATA,SRIKALAHASTI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), TIRUPATI

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

Bench: Us:

68,428 under the head "income from other sources" 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.AO/NFAC/CIT(A) erred in levying interest under Section 23B and Section 234C of the Act Additional Grounds being raised before the Hon'ble ITAT for the first time 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case

CALLIDUSCLOUD (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE- 1(1), HYDERABAD

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

68,544/- by making addition towards TP adjustment suggested by the learned TPO. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee filed objections before the Hon’ble Dispute Resolution Panel challenging the TP adjustments made by the learned TPO. The Hon’ble DRP, vide its directions issued under Section 144C(5) of the Act dated 11.09.2024, partly allowed the objections of the assessee

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:

144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) dated 29.03.2022 for A.Y. 2013-14 and A.Y. 2014-15, respectively. As common issues are involved in the captioned appeals, therefore, the same are taken up and disposed of by this consolidated order. 2. We shall first take up the appeal filed by the assessee

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:

144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) dated 29.03.2022 for A.Y. 2013-14 and A.Y. 2014-15, respectively. As common issues are involved in the captioned appeals, therefore, the same are taken up and disposed of by this consolidated order. 2. We shall first take up the appeal filed by the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, WARANGAL vs. SHIVA KUMAR THOTA, WARANGAL

In the result, the primary objection filed by the assessee vide his letter, dated 02/06/2025 is allowed while for the appeal filed by

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.996/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shiva Kumar Thota, Ward-1, Warangal. Warangal. Pan: Aaopt4519M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 06/08/2024 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, “The Act”), Dated 26/05/2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Revenue Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

144B of the Act, dated 26/05/2023 assessed the income of the assessee at Rs.8,15,30,754/- after making certain additions, viz., (i) cash deposited during demonetization period: Rs.2,35,06,868/-; (ii) cash deposited during post demonetization period: Rs.4,89,51,132/-; (iii) addition of unproved sundry creditors under section 68

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

144B of the Act on 20.12.2023,\nmaking additions of Rs.92,75,690/- under section 69A of the Act\nand Rs.1,20,81,000/- under section 68

VENKATA RAMA KRISHNAM RAJU CHINTALAPATI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 8(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Us.

section 148 of the Act, dated 31.03.2023, was issued by the AO. In response, the assessee filed his return of income, declaring an income of Rs. 7,98,890/-. 3. Thereafter, the AO, vide his order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, due to the failure of the assessee to comply with various notices during the assessment

SUDHA DOSHI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO - WARD 5(1), HYDERABAD

section\n147 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 24/05/2023 determined the income of\nthe assessee at Rs.48,68,181/- after

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

Appeal is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

144B of the Act, dated 31/03/2022. Elaborating on his contention, the Ld. AR submitted that as the impugned notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 24/03/2021, was never served upon the assessee firm, therefore, the said material defect goes to the very root of the jurisdiction that was assumed by the AO for framing the assessment. On merit

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

Appeal is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

144B of the Act, dated 31/03/2022. Elaborating on his contention, the Ld. AR submitted that as the impugned notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 24/03/2021, was never served upon the assessee firm, therefore, the said material defect goes to the very root of the jurisdiction that was assumed by the AO for framing the assessment. On merit

SSNC FINTECH SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 8(1), HYDERABAD

68,70,340/-. The appellant-\ncompany has also filed Form-3CEB and reported various\ninternational transactions including provision of ITS and\nITES. The appellant-company is a captive service provider to\nit's AE on cost plus basis as per the agreement entered into\nby it with it's AEs. The appellant-company has carried-out\nTP analysis documents

ABRAHAM NATHANIEL ADDANKI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1148/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2016-17) Abraham Nathaniel Vs. Income Tax Officer, Addanki, Ward-14(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Adqpa7546N

section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 30/03/2022 after making the aforesaid additions, determined the income of the assessee at Rs.1,68

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:

68 of the Act. Accordingly, the AO vide his order passed under section 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated

PENNAR INDUSTRIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1),, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company is partly allowed/partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us:

144B of the Act, dated 20.09.2022, the Ld. AR submitted that the AO vide his notice u/s 142(1) of the Act, dated 20/02/2022, had specifically directed the assessee company to furnish complete details of the debts that were written off during the year under consideration, i.e., details of the debts alongwith names, PAN, amount of interest paid, and copies

INDEED INDIA OPERATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE -(1) , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee for the\n

68,62,731 towards interest on outstanding receivables.\n2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nLd. TPO erred and the Hon'ble DRP further erred in\nupholding/confirming the action of the Ld. TPO, in rejecting the\ntransfer pricing analysis/study prepared by the Appellant and\nconducting fresh benchmarking, without appreciating that none

SHREEJI FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Shreeji Foods Private Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 3(1), Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aalcs2695H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, C.A. Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr.D.R. Date Of Hearing: 09.01.2025 15.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement:

68 of the Act and penalty proceedings were initiated under section 271(1)(c) for concealing income. Thereafter, Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B