VK WAREHOUSING ENTERPRISES,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee firm and the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of our observations recorded hereinabove

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.737/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aakfv3288R (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.881/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Vs. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.A. राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri P. Dhivahar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/01/2026

220/-. 4. Subsequently, the AO passed a rectification order under Section 154 of the Act, dated 10/11/2021, wherein he rectified the rate of tax applied and subjected the additions made under Section 68

ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD vs. VK WAREHOUSING ENTERPRISES, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee firm and\nthe revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of\nour observations recorded hereinabove

68 of the Act: Rs. 25,85,800/-. Accordingly,\nthe AO, vide his order passed under Section 144 of the Act, dated\n26/11/2019, converted the returned loss into a positive income\nof Rs. 3,37,78,220

ZAVERI EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2018-19 Zaveri Exports Private Limited, Vs. The Acit, Central Circle – 3(4), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaacz1286A. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri H. Srinivasulu, Advocate. Revenue By: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.07.2024

section 68 is not applicable based Ori the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the Common clause (A Registered society) and others 394 ITR 220

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

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

220\n1,12,80,120\n27\n2,305\n6,764\n2,01,550\n54,87,950\n28\n838\n4,923\n2,02,790\n23,71,090\n29\n1,773\n2,824\n2,08,360\n40,36,760\n30\n2,926\n5,920\n1,59,590\n66,03,590\n31\n2,600\n2,571\n1,49,640\n56,06,740\nTotal

DEEPA GUPTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

68 of the Act. 5. Aggrieved thereby, the assessees preferred appeals before the learned CIT(A) and, among other things, argued that there was no incriminating material relevant to the matter on the issue pertaining to these assessment years and since no assessment was pending for these assessment years as on the date of search in terms of the decision

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1) , HYDERABAD vs. VIRENDER KUMAR GUPTA , HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ष अपीलार्थीर्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / / Ita No. / A.Y. Appellant Respondent Narender Kumar Gupta, Assistant 45/Hyd/2022 2012-13 Hyderabad Commissioner Of [Pan: Aezpg9653A] Income Tax, 46/Hyd/2022 2013-14 Central Circle-3(1), Virender Kumar Gupta, Hyderabad 47/Hyd/2022 2012-13 Hyderabad [Pan: Aaspg1887D]

68 of the Act in case of these assessees for these years. 5. Aggrieved thereby, the assessees preferred appeals before the learned CIT(A) and, among other things, argued that there was no Page 2 of 9 ITA Nos. 45, 46 & 47/Hyd/2022 incriminating material relevant to the matter on the issue pertaining to these assessment years and since no assessment

NARENDER KUMAR GUPTA ,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ष अपीलार्थीर्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / / Ita No. / A.Y. Appellant Respondent Narender Kumar Gupta, Assistant 45/Hyd/2022 2012-13 Hyderabad Commissioner Of [Pan: Aezpg9653A] Income Tax, 46/Hyd/2022 2013-14 Central Circle-3(1), Virender Kumar Gupta, Hyderabad 47/Hyd/2022 2012-13 Hyderabad [Pan: Aaspg1887D]

68 of the Act in case of these assessees for these years. 5. Aggrieved thereby, the assessees preferred appeals before the learned CIT(A) and, among other things, argued that there was no Page 2 of 9 ITA Nos. 45, 46 & 47/Hyd/2022 incriminating material relevant to the matter on the issue pertaining to these assessment years and since no assessment

NARENDER KUMAR GUPTA ,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ष अपीलार्थीर्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / / Ita No. / A.Y. Appellant Respondent Narender Kumar Gupta, Assistant 45/Hyd/2022 2012-13 Hyderabad Commissioner Of [Pan: Aezpg9653A] Income Tax, 46/Hyd/2022 2013-14 Central Circle-3(1), Virender Kumar Gupta, Hyderabad 47/Hyd/2022 2012-13 Hyderabad [Pan: Aaspg1887D]

68 of the Act in case of these assessees for these years. 5. Aggrieved thereby, the assessees preferred appeals before the learned CIT(A) and, among other things, argued that there was no Page 2 of 9 ITA Nos. 45, 46 & 47/Hyd/2022 incriminating material relevant to the matter on the issue pertaining to these assessment years and since no assessment

DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. UNITED DEVELOPER, HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objections file d by the assessee firm in A

Bench: Us As A Cross-Objector. Since Common Issues Are Involved In The Captioned Appeals & Cross-Objections, Therefore, The Same Have Been Taken Up & Disposed Of By A Consolidated Order. We Shall First Take Up The Appeal Filed By The Revenue & The Cross- Objection Of The Assessee Firm For A.Y.2016-17 & The Order Therein Passed Shall Apply Mutatis Mutandis For The Purpose Of Disposing Of The Other Appeal & Cross-Objection.

220 ( Del), wherein the Hon’ble High Court had while circumscribing the scope of powers of the Tribunal had, inter alia, observed that as the Tribunal acts purely as an appellate authority, therefore, it has to see whether the assessment framed by the AO, for that matter, CO No.14 & 15/Hyd/2025 United Developer orders of the CIT(A) were according

DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1),, HYDERABAD vs. UNITED DEVELOPER, HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objections file d by the assessee firm in A

Bench: Us As A Cross-Objector. Since Common Issues Are Involved In The Captioned Appeals & Cross-Objections, Therefore, The Same Have Been Taken Up & Disposed Of By A Consolidated Order. We Shall First Take Up The Appeal Filed By The Revenue & The Cross- Objection Of The Assessee Firm For A.Y.2016-17 & The Order Therein Passed Shall Apply Mutatis Mutandis For The Purpose Of Disposing Of The Other Appeal & Cross-Objection.

220 ( Del), wherein the Hon’ble High Court had while circumscribing the scope of powers of the Tribunal had, inter alia, observed that as the Tribunal acts purely as an appellate authority, therefore, it has to see whether the assessment framed by the AO, for that matter, CO No.14 & 15/Hyd/2025 United Developer orders of the CIT(A) were according

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. JAYA BALAJEE REAL MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the C

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. C. I.T. Vs. Jaya Balajee Real Media Central Circle 2(3) P Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaecb3005 F (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O No.3/Hyd/2020 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3/Hyd/2020) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jaya Balajee Real Media P Vs. Dy. C. I.T. Ltd, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(3) Pan:Aaecb3005 F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeeval Lal Lavidiya, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 25/07/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/08/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, Vice-This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 2.10.2019 Of The Learned Cit (A)-12, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2012-13. The Assessee Has Also Filed A C.O No.3/Hyd/2020 Against The Appeal Filed By The Revenue. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

220/- before the Income Tax Officer Corporate Ward 2(3) Chennai. This return was selected for scrutiny under CASS and the assessment was completed u/s 144 of the Act on 27.03.2015 by making disallowance of Rs.48,63,606/- on account of operational expenses. The case was reopened u/s 147 of the Act on 22.9.2015 to bring the unexplained share application

MSN LABORATORIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

Section 132(4) of the\nAct was recorded from Shri R. Buchi Reddy on 24.02.2021, and in\nresponse to Question No. 18, he has stated that details of cash\ngenerated from the sale of utilized solvents and scrap has been\nmaintained by him in an excel work book APRIL 19.29.04.19XZ.\nxls, found in the seized pen-drive

ITO, WARD-16(1),, HYDERABAD vs. M/S LANCO HILLS TECHNOLOGY PARK (P) LIMITED,, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 751/Hyd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Income Tax Officer, M/S. Lanco Hills Technology Park Ward-16(1), Vs. (P) Ltd., Hyderabad. Hyderabad. [Pan: Aabcl1228R] अपीलाथ" / Appellant "" यथ" / Respondent

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), the learned Assessing Officer considered the income of Rs. 14,68,17,832/- as shown in the second ROI filed on 04/05/2010, and ignored the third and fourth Returns of Income’s filed on 01/09/2010 and 06/06/2011, respectively. 3. Aggrieved of the action of learned Assessing Officer

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. HINDUPUR BIO-ENERGY PVT. LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed, and the appeal of Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Hindupur Bio-Energy Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabch0124J. (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross-Appellant) Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Hindupur Bio-Energy Of Income Tax, Private Limited, Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabch0124J. (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross-Appellant) Assessee By: Shri M. Chandramouleswara Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Shri L.V. Bhaskara Reddy, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.12.2023

section 253(5) of the Act, the Tribunal may admit an appeal filed beyond the period of limitation where it is satisfied that there exists a sufficient cause on the part of the assessee for not presenting the appeal within the prescribed time. The moot point is as to whether such a long delay deserves condonation. At this stage

HINDUPUR BIO-ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed, and the appeal of Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Hindupur Bio-Energy Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabch0124J. (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross-Appellant) Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Hindupur Bio-Energy Of Income Tax, Private Limited, Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabch0124J. (Appellant) (Respondent / Cross-Appellant) Assessee By: Shri M. Chandramouleswara Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Shri L.V. Bhaskara Reddy, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.12.2023

section 253(5) of the Act, the Tribunal may admit an appeal filed beyond the period of limitation where it is satisfied that there exists a sufficient cause on the part of the assessee for not presenting the appeal within the prescribed time. The moot point is as to whether such a long delay deserves condonation. At this stage

ITO, WARD-1, KURNOOL, KURNOOL vs. S.V. MOHAN REDDY, KURNOOL, KURNOOL

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

68 of the l.T. Act, 1961 are to be treated as the business receipts of agricultural commodities with out any evidence of purchase bills of the same and more so when these receipts are not even disclosed in the Return of Income filed by the assessee and taken this, after thought stand at the time of assessment to explain

ANKITJAIN,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in\nterms of our above observation

68,750\n16-05-2019\n1,30,350\n17,88,750\n14.89.150\nCheque\nCheque\n1st Floor\n12,08,250\n10,24,630\n2nd Floor\n10,53,000\n8,83,220\n22,61,250\n19,07,850\nTotal recd\n40,50,000\n33,97,000\n7. From the above, it is clear that the assessee had purchased the property under\nquestion

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. SRI CHAITANYA EDUCATIONAL COMMITTE, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

220/- on 28.12.2017 making addition with regard to 23 ITA.No.325/Hyd./2023 function hall rental income and the order for AY 2016-17 was passed on 30.12.2018 on account of disallowance of hire charges of Rs.47,68,512/-. There is no disallowance with regard to payments made to JV and VEMPL wherein it is noticed that the payment has been