PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

153B of the Act, is consequential and the A.O. gets jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 153A of the Act, and the time limits are decided with reference to the last panchanama drawn while concluding the search. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the legal ground taken by the assessee. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), in respect of additions

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

153B of the Act, is consequential and the A.O. gets jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 153A of the Act, and the time limits are decided with reference to the last panchanama drawn while concluding the search. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the legal ground taken by the assessee. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), in respect of additions

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

153B of the Act, is consequential and the A.O. gets jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 153A of the Act, and the time limits are decided with reference to the last panchanama drawn while concluding the search. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the legal ground taken by the assessee. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), in respect of additions

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

153B of the Act, is consequential and the A.O. gets jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 153A of the Act, and the time limits are decided with reference to the last panchanama drawn while concluding the search. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the legal ground taken by the assessee. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), in respect of additions

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

153B of the Act, is consequential and the A.O. gets jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 153A of the Act, and the time limits are decided with reference to the last panchanama drawn while concluding the search. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the legal ground taken by the assessee. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), in respect of additions

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

153B of the Act, is consequential and the A.O. gets jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 153A of the Act, and the time limits are decided with reference to the last panchanama drawn while concluding the search. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the legal ground taken by the assessee. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), in respect of additions

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

153B of the Act, is consequential and the A.O. gets jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 153A of the Act, and the time limits are decided with reference to the last panchanama drawn while concluding the search. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the legal ground taken by the assessee. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), in respect of additions

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

153B of the Act, is consequential and the A.O. gets jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 153A of the Act, and the time limits are decided with reference to the last panchanama drawn while concluding the search. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the legal ground taken by the assessee. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), in respect of additions

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

153B of the Act, is consequential and the A.O. gets jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 153A of the Act, and the time limits are decided with reference to the last panchanama drawn while concluding the search. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the legal ground taken by the assessee. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), in respect of additions

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

153B of the Act, is consequential and the A.O. gets jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 153A of the Act, and the time limits are decided with reference to the last panchanama drawn while concluding the search. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the legal ground taken by the assessee. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), in respect of additions

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(4), HYDERABAD

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

153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, because the time limit available for the A.O., for completion of assessment under Section 153C of the Act, is 12 months form the end of the financial year in which the last of the authorisation for search under Section 132 of the Act, was conducted and in the present case

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

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

153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, because the time limit available for the A.O., for completion of assessment under Section 153C of the Act, is 12 months form the end of the financial year in which the last of the authorisation for search under Section 132 of the Act, was conducted and in the present case

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

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

153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, because the time limit available for the A.O., for completion of assessment under Section 153C of the Act, is 12 months form the end of the financial year in which the last of the authorisation for search under Section 132 of the Act, was conducted and in the present case

SYED AHMED ZEESHANUDDIN,HYDERABAD vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.156/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

153B of the Act as the notice u/s 153C was issued on 30.03.2022 and the time limit to finalize the assessment is on or before 31.03.2023. 7. (a) The Ld.AO has grossly erred by not appreciating the fact that in the hands of the searched party no addition for this amount was made as unaccounted income while passing assessment order

ASRA AHMED ,HYDERABAD vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.156/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

153B of the Act as the notice u/s 153C was issued on 30.03.2022 and the time limit to finalize the assessment is on or before 31.03.2023. 7. (a) The Ld.AO has grossly erred by not appreciating the fact that in the hands of the searched party no addition for this amount was made as unaccounted income while passing assessment order

RAVI RAMBABU,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 651/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Ravi Rambabu, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Hyderabad. Of Income Tax, Circle-2(3), Pan: Abspr3702P Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 17/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 26/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Rectification Order Dated 28.03.2025 Passed By The Cit (Appeals) Under Section 154 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act"), Dated 28.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Cit(A) Disposing Of The Assessee’S Appeal, Vide His Order Dated 29.01.2025. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order Passed By The Cit(A)

153B of the IT Act, 1961 whereas the assessment has been completed on 20.03.2023. 8. Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated on the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case that the provisions of section 68

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

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang, Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

153B and section 153C, all other provisions of the Act shall apply to the assessment made under section 153A. Hence, provisions of Chapter VI-A are applicable to proceedings under section 153A and in this regard, he relied upon the decision of ITAT Pune Bench in the case of Malpani Estates Vs. ACIT reported

VILAS POLYMER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the remaining appeals filed by the assessees (at Sl

68,000/- under Section 115BBE of the Act. 8. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 9. The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri M. V. Prasad, C.A., referring to petition filed by the assessee for admission of additional ground, submitted that, the assessee has taken a legal ground