MRL TRADING COMPANY,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-7(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

158\n5,20,61,626 75.48,935\nAs per Books\nof accounts\n146,53,44,162 1,27,02,093 146,53,44,160\nTurnovers as\nper VAT 200 Tax\n126,72,77,290\n10,64,85,917\nAs per Books\nof accounts\n0\n53,24,295\n5,44,90,413\n79,01,109\n142

C.M.GOPAL,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2011-12 C.M. Gopal, Hyderabad. Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Pan – Abvpc 2460L Central Circle – 2, Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao Revenue By Shri Yvst Sai Date Of Hearing: 16/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26/04/2021

section 68 of the Act. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the CIT(A) has rightly decide the issue against the assessee and accordingly, we uphold the order of the CIT(A) and dismiss the ground raised by the assessee on this issue. 9. As regards ground No. 9 and its sub-grounds (a) to (m) regarding

PENNINTI VIVEKANANDA RAO,HYDERABAD vs. ADIT (INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1494/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Shri Penninti Vivekananda Vs. Adit (International Rao, Hyderabad Taxation)-2 Pan:Ayupp1895L Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate H Srinivasulu राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. U Mini Chandran, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Penninti Vivekananda Rao (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 29.07.2025 For The A.Y 2020-21. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

68,672/- arising from surrender of three Equity Plus Fund issued by Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd. (“Bajaj Equity Plus Fund”). The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS, and statutory notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (“ the Act”) were issued to the assessee. The assessee

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 08/12/2023 determined the income of the assessee at Rs.66,96,810/-. 6. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but without success. 7. The assessee being aggrieved with the order

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

68 01-07-2017 137-138 Notice under section 13(2) by Andhra Bank for enforcement 69 07-09-2017 of security interest in case of B Narasimha Reddy 139-140 Summons issued for the debts of Bank of Maharashtra by 70 08-09-2017 Debt Recovery Tribunal to Elite Infra Projects Private 14 I Limited Reply by Canara

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

68 01-07-2017 137-138 Notice under section 13(2) by Andhra Bank for enforcement 69 07-09-2017 of security interest in case of B Narasimha Reddy 139-140 Summons issued for the debts of Bank of Maharashtra by 70 08-09-2017 Debt Recovery Tribunal to Elite Infra Projects Private 14 I Limited Reply by Canara

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

68 01-07-2017 137-138 Notice under section 13(2) by Andhra Bank for enforcement 69 07-09-2017 of security interest in case of B Narasimha Reddy 139-140 Summons issued for the debts of Bank of Maharashtra by 70 08-09-2017 Debt Recovery Tribunal to Elite Infra Projects Private 14 I Limited Reply by Canara

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

68 01-07-2017 137-138 Notice under section 13(2) by Andhra Bank for enforcement 69 07-09-2017 of security interest in case of B Narasimha Reddy 139-140 Summons issued for the debts of Bank of Maharashtra by 70 08-09-2017 Debt Recovery Tribunal to Elite Infra Projects Private 14 I Limited Reply by Canara

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

68 01-07-2017 137-138 Notice under section 13(2) by Andhra Bank for enforcement 69 07-09-2017 of security interest in case of B Narasimha Reddy 139-140 Summons issued for the debts of Bank of Maharashtra by 70 08-09-2017 Debt Recovery Tribunal to Elite Infra Projects Private 14 I Limited Reply by Canara

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

68 01-07-2017 137-138 Notice under section 13(2) by Andhra Bank for enforcement 69 07-09-2017 of security interest in case of B Narasimha Reddy 139-140 Summons issued for the debts of Bank of Maharashtra by 70 08-09-2017 Debt Recovery Tribunal to Elite Infra Projects Private 14 I Limited Reply by Canara

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

68 01-07-2017 137-138 Notice under section 13(2) by Andhra Bank for enforcement 69 07-09-2017 of security interest in case of B Narasimha Reddy 139-140 Summons issued for the debts of Bank of Maharashtra by 70 08-09-2017 Debt Recovery Tribunal to Elite Infra Projects Private 14 I Limited Reply by Canara

BRIJESH CHANDWANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE -6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2020-2021 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1527 & 1528/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years – 2016-2017 & 2020-2021 Brijesh Chandwani The Dcit, Circle-6(1), Vs. Hyderabad – 500 034 Hyderabad. Pan Adkpc1537H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Pawan Kumar Chakrapani राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Ar

68. In addition to the above, the time granted to the petitioner to respond to the notice dated 30.05.2022 - the period of two weeks -is also required to be excluded by virtue of the third proviso to Section 149(1) of the Act. The petitioner had furnished its response to the notice under Section 148A

BRIJESH CHANDWANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE -6(1), HYDERABAD

68. In addition to the above, the time granted to the petitioner to respond to the notice dated 30.05.2022 - the period of two weeks -is also required to be excluded by virtue of the third proviso to Section 149(1) of the Act. The petitioner had furnished its response to the notice under Section 148A

DR. REDDYS LABORATORIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Years: 2007-08 Dr.Reddy’S Laboratories Vs. Dcit,Circle-17(1) Limited Hyderabad 8-2-337, Road No.3 Banjara Hills Hyderabad-500 034

158 ITR 41 (Raj); CIT (Addl) Vs Chemical Limes (1984) 149IR 325 (Raj) it was held that under section 154, an assessing officer cannot be permitted to revise or review his earlier order. In the case of CIT Vs Ram Bahadur Thakur Ltd (1999) 237 ITR 217 (Ker) it was held that review cannot be under taken

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1), HYDERABAD vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1018/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Andhra Bank Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 1(1) Pan:Aabca7375C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1230/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 ) Dy. C. I. T. Vs. Andhra Bank Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabca7375C (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ananthan, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 28/08/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee, As Well As The Revenue, Are Directed Against The Order Dated 16/02/2016 Of Page 1 Of 59

68,70,494/- as provision made for bad and doubtful debts as against the actual provision for bad and doubtful debts made by the appellant in its books of account for Rs.785,63,70,494/-. The facts are not clear. The Assessing Officer observed that as per note on accounts under Schedule 18 at point 10.1 on page

UNION BANK OF INDIA,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSISONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1018/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Andhra Bank Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 1(1) Pan:Aabca7375C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1230/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 ) Dy. C. I. T. Vs. Andhra Bank Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabca7375C (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ananthan, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 28/08/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee, As Well As The Revenue, Are Directed Against The Order Dated 16/02/2016 Of Page 1 Of 59

68,70,494/- as provision made for bad and doubtful debts as against the actual provision for bad and doubtful debts made by the appellant in its books of account for Rs.785,63,70,494/-. The facts are not clear. The Assessing Officer observed that as per note on accounts under Schedule 18 at point 10.1 on page

GOPI GUNDA,NALGONDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

section 115BBE of the I.T. Act. Thus, the Assessing Officer determined the income of the assessee at Rs.34,74,158/-. Page 2 of 6 ITA 124 and 125 of 2023 Gopi Gunda Nalgonda 4. Since the assessee did not appear before the CIT (A) despite number of opportunities granted, the learned CIT (A) in the ex-parte order passed

GOPI GUNDA ,NALGONDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

section 115BBE of the I.T. Act. Thus, the Assessing Officer determined the income of the assessee at Rs.34,74,158/-. Page 2 of 6 ITA 124 and 125 of 2023 Gopi Gunda Nalgonda 4. Since the assessee did not appear before the CIT (A) despite number of opportunities granted, the learned CIT (A) in the ex-parte order passed