INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. GENESIS CROP SCIENCES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonya.Y. 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Genesis Crop Sciences Ward-2(2), (India) Pvt Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aaccg 7207 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri K.A. Sai Prasad Revenue By: Sri Sunil Kumar Pandey Date Of Hearing: 17/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 03/05/2021 Order Per A. Mohan Alankamony, Am.:

3) of the Act on 28/03/2015 wherein the Ld. AO made addition of Rs. 4,42,69,513/- invoking the provisions of section 68 of the Act because the assessee could not establish the genuineness of its sundry creditors. On appeal Ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition. 4. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, it was observed

DCIT., (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERABAD vs. SYAMA REDDY MALI REDDY, HYDERABAD

68,370/-\nby an amount of Rs.7,58,13,772/-. Apart from that, the A.O.\ndeclined the assessee's claim for deduction under Section 54 of the\nAct on two grounds, viz. (i) the assessee had not purchased the new\nresidential house within two years from the date of transfer of the\noriginal asset; and (ii) the assessee owned

PUJALA MAHESH BABU ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Assessee Revenue A.Y 132/Hyd/2018 Shri Pujala Mahesh A.C.I.T. Central 2012-13 Babu, Hyderabad Circle-2(3) Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L 133/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 134/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 135/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2015-16 126/Hyd/2019 A.C.I.T. Central Shri Pujala Mahesh 2013-14 Circle-2(3) Babu, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram,Dr

section 68 & 69 of the Act have no application in absence of maintenance of books of account, we accept the alternate contention of the assessee that only 40% of the amount should be added. We direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the addition to 40% of Rs.94,50,000/- as against the whole amount made by the Assessing Officer

PUJALA MAHESH BABU,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Assessee Revenue A.Y 132/Hyd/2018 Shri Pujala Mahesh A.C.I.T. Central 2012-13 Babu, Hyderabad Circle-2(3) Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L 133/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 134/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 135/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2015-16 126/Hyd/2019 A.C.I.T. Central Shri Pujala Mahesh 2013-14 Circle-2(3) Babu, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram,Dr

section 68 & 69 of the Act have no application in absence of maintenance of books of account, we accept the alternate contention of the assessee that only 40% of the amount should be added. We direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the addition to 40% of Rs.94,50,000/- as against the whole amount made by the Assessing Officer

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. PUJALA MAHESH BABU , RANGA REDDY

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Assessee Revenue A.Y 132/Hyd/2018 Shri Pujala Mahesh A.C.I.T. Central 2012-13 Babu, Hyderabad Circle-2(3) Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L 133/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 134/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 135/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2015-16 126/Hyd/2019 A.C.I.T. Central Shri Pujala Mahesh 2013-14 Circle-2(3) Babu, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram,Dr

section 68 & 69 of the Act have no application in absence of maintenance of books of account, we accept the alternate contention of the assessee that only 40% of the amount should be added. We direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the addition to 40% of Rs.94,50,000/- as against the whole amount made by the Assessing Officer

PUJALA MAHESH BABU ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Assessee Revenue A.Y 132/Hyd/2018 Shri Pujala Mahesh A.C.I.T. Central 2012-13 Babu, Hyderabad Circle-2(3) Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L 133/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 134/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 135/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2015-16 126/Hyd/2019 A.C.I.T. Central Shri Pujala Mahesh 2013-14 Circle-2(3) Babu, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram,Dr

section 68 & 69 of the Act have no application in absence of maintenance of books of account, we accept the alternate contention of the assessee that only 40% of the amount should be added. We direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the addition to 40% of Rs.94,50,000/- as against the whole amount made by the Assessing Officer

PUJALA MAHESH BABU,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Assessee Revenue A.Y 132/Hyd/2018 Shri Pujala Mahesh A.C.I.T. Central 2012-13 Babu, Hyderabad Circle-2(3) Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L 133/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 134/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 135/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2015-16 126/Hyd/2019 A.C.I.T. Central Shri Pujala Mahesh 2013-14 Circle-2(3) Babu, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram,Dr

section 68 & 69 of the Act have no application in absence of maintenance of books of account, we accept the alternate contention of the assessee that only 40% of the amount should be added. We direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the addition to 40% of Rs.94,50,000/- as against the whole amount made by the Assessing Officer

PITTI HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.450/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19) M/S. Pitti Holdings Pvt. Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Ltd., Hyderabad. Income Tax, Central Circle Pan: Aagcp3824Q 1(1), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A. राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 08/10/2025

156 taxmann.com 478 (Gauhati), the Hon’ble High Court has held in para 13 to 19 as under : 9 ITA.No.450/Hyd./2025 10 ITA.No.450/Hyd./2025 11 ITA.No.450/Hyd./2025 12 ITA.No.450/Hyd./2025 13 ITA.No.450/Hyd./2025 14 ITA.No.450/Hyd./2025 15 ITA.No.450/Hyd./2025 16 ITA.No.450/Hyd./2025 14. Thus, it is clear that the issue raised

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3,63,000/-, for A.Y. 2015-16 amounting to Rs.7,26,100/- and for A.Y. 2016-17 amounting to Rs.93,73,716/-. 23. The facts with regard to the impugned issue are that, during the course of search proceedings, certain notings in the form of cash sheets were found as attachments to emails in the personal email account of Shri

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3,63,000/-, for A.Y. 2015-16 amounting to Rs.7,26,100/- and for A.Y. 2016-17 amounting to Rs.93,73,716/-. 23. The facts with regard to the impugned issue are that, during the course of search proceedings, certain notings in the form of cash sheets were found as attachments to emails in the personal email account of Shri

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3,63,000/-, for A.Y. 2015-16 amounting to Rs.7,26,100/- and for A.Y. 2016-17 amounting to Rs.93,73,716/-. 23. The facts with regard to the impugned issue are that, during the course of search proceedings, certain notings in the form of cash sheets were found as attachments to emails in the personal email account of Shri

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3,63,000/-, for A.Y. 2015-16 amounting to Rs.7,26,100/- and for A.Y. 2016-17 amounting to Rs.93,73,716/-. 23. The facts with regard to the impugned issue are that, during the course of search proceedings, certain notings in the form of cash sheets were found as attachments to emails in the personal email account of Shri

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3,63,000/-, for A.Y. 2015-16 amounting to Rs.7,26,100/- and for A.Y. 2016-17 amounting to Rs.93,73,716/-. 23. The facts with regard to the impugned issue are that, during the course of search proceedings, certain notings in the form of cash sheets were found as attachments to emails in the personal email account of Shri

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3,63,000/-, for A.Y. 2015-16 amounting to Rs.7,26,100/- and for A.Y. 2016-17 amounting to Rs.93,73,716/-. 23. The facts with regard to the impugned issue are that, during the course of search proceedings, certain notings in the form of cash sheets were found as attachments to emails in the personal email account of Shri

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3,63,000/-, for A.Y. 2015-16 amounting to Rs.7,26,100/- and for A.Y. 2016-17 amounting to Rs.93,73,716/-. 23. The facts with regard to the impugned issue are that, during the course of search proceedings, certain notings in the form of cash sheets were found as attachments to emails in the personal email account of Shri

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3,63,000/-, for A.Y. 2015-16 amounting to Rs.7,26,100/- and for A.Y. 2016-17 amounting to Rs.93,73,716/-. 23. The facts with regard to the impugned issue are that, during the course of search proceedings, certain notings in the form of cash sheets were found as attachments to emails in the personal email account of Shri

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3,63,000/-, for A.Y. 2015-16 amounting to Rs.7,26,100/- and for A.Y. 2016-17 amounting to Rs.93,73,716/-. 23. The facts with regard to the impugned issue are that, during the course of search proceedings, certain notings in the form of cash sheets were found as attachments to emails in the personal email account of Shri

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3,63,000/-, for A.Y. 2015-16 amounting to Rs.7,26,100/- and for A.Y. 2016-17 amounting to Rs.93,73,716/-. 23. The facts with regard to the impugned issue are that, during the course of search proceedings, certain notings in the form of cash sheets were found as attachments to emails in the personal email account of Shri