ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(1), HYDERABAD vs. M/S. MUSADDILAL GEMS AND JEWELS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, we uphold the addition of Rs

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 68 should be satisfied together and further cast the initial burden of proving the credits in their books on the assessee are relied upon: The Apex Court in the landmark case of Kalekhan Mohd Haneef Vs CIT (1963) 50 ITR 01 (SC) and Roshan Di Hatti Vs CIT (1977) (107 ITR (SC) laid down that the onus

MUSADDILAL GEMS JEWELS PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, we uphold the addition of Rs

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 68 should be satisfied together and further cast the initial burden of proving the credits in their books on the assessee are relied upon: The Apex Court in the landmark case of Kalekhan Mohd Haneef Vs CIT (1963) 50 ITR 01 (SC) and Roshan Di Hatti Vs CIT (1977) (107 ITR (SC) laid down that the onus

ANANDA PRASAD VENIGALA,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1384/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Ananda Prasad Venigala, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan:Aewpp1096B (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 31/07/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 06/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Ananda Prasad Venigala (“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 18.11.2024 For The A.Y. 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

197/-. By no stretch of imagination can Section 14A or Rule 8D be interpreted so as to mean that the entire tax exempt income is to be disallowed. The window for disallowance is indicated in Section 14A, and is only to the extent of disallowing expenditure "incurred by the assessee in relation to the tax exempt income". This

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD vs. REJUVENTING APPROACHES PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

197/-. Subsequently, a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the I.T. Act was conducted in the case of the assessee and its Directors Sri Moturi Srinivas Prasad and Shri Volam Bhaskar Rao on 20.09.2017. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act issued on 10.05.2018, the assessee filed its return of income on 13.12.2018 declaring total income

NANDAN CLEANTEC LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

197/-. Subsequently, a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the I.T. Act was conducted in the case of the assessee and its Directors Sri Moturi Srinivas Prasad and Shri Volam Bhaskar Rao on 20.09.2017. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act issued on 10.05.2018, the assessee filed its return of income on 13.12.2018 declaring total income

NANDAN CLEANTEC LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

197/-. Subsequently, a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the I.T. Act was conducted in the case of the assessee and its Directors Sri Moturi Srinivas Prasad and Shri Volam Bhaskar Rao on 20.09.2017. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act issued on 10.05.2018, the assessee filed its return of income on 13.12.2018 declaring total income

NANDAN CLEANTEC LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

197/-. Subsequently, a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the I.T. Act was conducted in the case of the assessee and its Directors Sri Moturi Srinivas Prasad and Shri Volam Bhaskar Rao on 20.09.2017. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act issued on 10.05.2018, the assessee filed its return of income on 13.12.2018 declaring total income

NANDAN CLEANTEC LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

197/-. Subsequently, a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the I.T. Act was conducted in the case of the assessee and its Directors Sri Moturi Srinivas Prasad and Shri Volam Bhaskar Rao on 20.09.2017. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act issued on 10.05.2018, the assessee filed its return of income on 13.12.2018 declaring total income

TARUN KUMAR GOYAL ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

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

section 11B/r/w11 (4) of the Act. The details of the 244 entities are as follows”. And vide para 8 of the order there is direction of revocation. Thus, SEBI also did not find any prima facie material for manipulation of price of scrip of Kailash Auto Finance Limited. Further it is to submit that if A.O. has found that

TARUN KUMAR GOYAL ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1)2, HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

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

section 11B/r/w11 (4) of the Act. The details of the 244 entities are as follows”. And vide para 8 of the order there is direction of revocation. Thus, SEBI also did not find any prima facie material for manipulation of price of scrip of Kailash Auto Finance Limited. Further it is to submit that if A.O. has found that

ARUN KUMAR GOYAL ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

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

section 11B/r/w11 (4) of the Act. The details of the 244 entities are as follows”. And vide para 8 of the order there is direction of revocation. Thus, SEBI also did not find any prima facie material for manipulation of price of scrip of Kailash Auto Finance Limited. Further it is to submit that if A.O. has found that

GONUGUNTLA NIRMALA DEVI,ANANTAPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 24 of the Income Tax Act. As per provisions, if the assessee has not realized any rent, the same will be reduced from the ALV and lower ALV will be declared. Further the quantum of unrealized rent cannot be more than the ALV declared in the current year.” 8.1. Thereafter, ld. AR has drawn our attention to Para

ISHOO NARANG,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.450/Hyd/2022 & S.A. No.1/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ishoo Narang Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 2(1) Pan:Aaupn9082B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Th Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15/07/2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Al The Mandatory Preconditions Before Reopening Of Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act Were Duly Complied & Met With By The A.O.

Section 68 of the Act, where any sum is found credited in the books of the assessee for any previous year the same may be charged to income tax as the income of the assesee of that previous year if the explanation offered by the assessee about the nature and source thereof is, in the opinion of the Assessing

CHANDRALOK HOTELS LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2011-12 Chandra Lok Hotels Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaccc 9912 A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue By: Shri Rajat Mitra Date Of Hearing: 19/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/08/2021

section 5OC of the Act. 5. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the .assessment where an sale consideration of Rs. 17,68,83,350/ _ had been adopted instead of the actual sale consideration of Rs. 15,00,00,000/ - 6. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the engaged property sold was in litigation

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

197/- considering it as income. 2.1. The Commissioner of income tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate the fact that there is no provision in the Income Tax Act under which such provision can be considered as income. 2.2. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in not following the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the Appellant bank

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

197/- considering it as income. 2.1. The Commissioner of income tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate the fact that there is no provision in the Income Tax Act under which such provision can be considered as income. 2.2. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in not following the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the Appellant bank

ALKOR PETROO LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Alkor Petroo Ltd Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 1(1) Pan:Aadca9825D Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Advocate T. Chaitanya Kumar Revenue By: Shri P. Chandrasekhar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 10/05/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Ex-Parte Order Dated 15.03.2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac, Delhi Relating To A.Y.2018-19. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Extraction Of Crude Oil. It Is Also Subsidiary Company Of M/S. Ivrcl Ltd (Under Liquidation As Going Concern As Per The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (Cirp). It Filed Its Return Of Income On 14.8.2018 Declaring Total Loss Of Rs.14,01,951/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass. Accordingly Statutory Notices Under Section 143(2) & 142(1) Were Issued & Served On The Assessee Through Itba On Page 1 Of 6

section 143(2) & 142(1) were issued and served on the assessee through ITBA on Page 1 of 6 ITA 197 of 2023 Alkor Petroo Ltd the email address sivareddy@ivrinfra.com and raghuram1@ivrinfra.com. However, there was no response to the above notices for which the Assessing Officer issued another letter to the assessee. However, there was no response from

SHARE MICROFIN LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-3(1), HYERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2016-17 Share Microfin Ltd Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaecs9243C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri A.G. Sitaraman, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 12/06/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23003.2020 Of The Learned Cit (A)-3, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2016-17. 2. There Is A Delay Of 5 Days In Filing Of This Appeal By The Assessee For Which The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Application Along With An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay. The Reasons Given Therein Is Due To The Prevailing Covid 2019 Pandemic. After Considering The Contents Of The Condonation Application Explaining The Reasons Filed Along With The Affidavit, The Delay In Filing Of The Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

68 Taxmann.com 289 c) Solid Containers Ltd vs. DCIT (2009) 178 Taxman 192) d) Logitronics (P) Ltd vs. CIT (2011) 197 Taxman 394. e) Rollatainers Ltd vs. CIT (2011) 15 Taxmann.com 111 11. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the AO and the learned CIT (A) and the paper book filed