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

In the result, all the appeals of assessees are dismissed

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

3. The ld.CIT(A) erred in upholding Assessing Officer’s treatment of sale proceeds of scrap of Rs.70,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 without any valid reason even though it was accounted for as business income in the books of accounts of the appellant firm. 4. The ld.CIT(A) erred in upholding Assessing Officer’s computation

SUPREME AGRO,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3 (1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessees are dismissed

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

3. The ld.CIT(A) erred in upholding Assessing Officer’s treatment of sale proceeds of scrap of Rs.70,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 without any valid reason even though it was accounted for as business income in the books of accounts of the appellant firm. 4. The ld.CIT(A) erred in upholding Assessing Officer’s computation

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 234A(3) and 234B(3) of the I.T. Act which are mandatory Page 16 of 82 ITA Nos 132 133 126 134 and 135 Puja Mahesh Babu Hyderabad and consequential in nature. Accordingly, this ground is dismissed. 29. In the result, appeal in ITA No.132/Hyd/2018 for the A.Y 2012-13 is partly allowed. ITA No.133/Hyd/2019

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 234A(3) and 234B(3) of the I.T. Act which are mandatory Page 16 of 82 ITA Nos 132 133 126 134 and 135 Puja Mahesh Babu Hyderabad and consequential in nature. Accordingly, this ground is dismissed. 29. In the result, appeal in ITA No.132/Hyd/2018 for the A.Y 2012-13 is partly allowed. ITA No.133/Hyd/2019

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 234A(3) and 234B(3) of the I.T. Act which are mandatory Page 16 of 82 ITA Nos 132 133 126 134 and 135 Puja Mahesh Babu Hyderabad and consequential in nature. Accordingly, this ground is dismissed. 29. In the result, appeal in ITA No.132/Hyd/2018 for the A.Y 2012-13 is partly allowed. ITA No.133/Hyd/2019

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 234A(3) and 234B(3) of the I.T. Act which are mandatory Page 16 of 82 ITA Nos 132 133 126 134 and 135 Puja Mahesh Babu Hyderabad and consequential in nature. Accordingly, this ground is dismissed. 29. In the result, appeal in ITA No.132/Hyd/2018 for the A.Y 2012-13 is partly allowed. ITA No.133/Hyd/2019

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 234A(3) and 234B(3) of the I.T. Act which are mandatory Page 16 of 82 ITA Nos 132 133 126 134 and 135 Puja Mahesh Babu Hyderabad and consequential in nature. Accordingly, this ground is dismissed. 29. In the result, appeal in ITA No.132/Hyd/2018 for the A.Y 2012-13 is partly allowed. ITA No.133/Hyd/2019

F5 NETWORKS INNOVATION PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section 11 is already considered in the regular assessment and that issue is already in appeal before FAA. Therefore, reviewing the same is uncalled for.” 8. Accordingly, in view of the above cited judgement of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court as well as the decision of the Delhi Benches of the Tribunal, we hold that the processing

AGARWAL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 68 of the Income Tax Act, is erroneous and untenable. 3. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not appreciating the evidence filed in support of the appellants plea that the said addition is unwarranted. 2 Agarwal Industries Pvt.Ltd. 4. In any event the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) erred is not appreciating that the said cash credit did not result

DEEPALI KAPOOR,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-12(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1097/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2022-23) Ms. Deepali Kapoor Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 12 (1) Pan:Annpk2904M Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Pawan Kumar Chakrapani राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri R. Kumaran, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Ms. Deepali Kapoor (“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 10.06.2025 For The A.Y 2022-23. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Impugned Order Of The Learned Authorities Below In So Far As It Is Against The Appellant Is Opposed To Law, Weight Of Page 1 Of 7

3. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in making an addition of an amount being Rs. 26,29,650/-, under section 68 of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in making an addition of an amount being Rs. 8,49,650/-, under section 68

N. NEMICHAND JEWELLERS,,SECUNDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (2), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. M. Nemichand Vs. A.C.I.T. Jewellers Secunderabad Central Circle 1(2) Pan:Aacfm8833B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri Pawan Kumar Chakrapani Revenue By: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 15/07/2022 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.02.2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y. 2019-20. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Is Engaged In The Business Of Retail-Trading Of Gold Jewellery & Pawn Brokers. During The Course Of Vehicle Checking Duty Conducted During Parliament Elections, The Police Intercepted Shri Anil Kumar Jain At 8.30 P M On 20.02.2019 Near Subhan Bakery, Nampally, Hyderabad & Found A Bag Containing Cash Of Rs. 10,00,000/- While He Was Riding Honda Activa Bearing Reg. No.Ts10El1501 & Seized The Cash.

3 Whether the learned Assessing Officer is justified in making an addition of Rs. 10,00,000/, as unexplained cash credit under section 69A of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case. A. Whether the learned Assessing Officer is justified in making addition of Rs. 10,00,000/-, even when the documents were submitted before

ANDHRA PRADESH BEVERAGES CORPORATION LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

68,15,051/- was remitted sales tax\ndepartment of AP w.r.t wholesale liquor trade. If it was\nactually state government of AP which has conducted\nbusiness, remittance of tax by one department of state\ngovernment to another department do not arise. Further\nSale Invoice (invoice cum delivery challan) at Page 12,\nPB Volume I shows that IMFL suppliers treat supply

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

section 68 r.w.s.115BBE. Assessed us. 143(3) r.w.s.153C of Income tax Act, 1901 Charge interest u/s.234A, 234B, 234C & 234D

ANDHRA PRADESH BEVERAGES CORPORATION LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

68,15,051/- was remitted sales tax\n\ndepartment of AP w.r.t wholesale liquor trade. If it was\nactually state government of AP which has conducted\nbusiness, remittance of tax by one department of state\ngovernment to another department do not arise. Further\nSale Invoice (invoice cum delivery challan) at Page 12,\nPB Volume I shows that IMFL suppliers treat

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

3. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in disallowing the loss of Rs. 70,59,688/-, claimed by the Appellant in the return of income, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in making an addition of Rs. 1,13,37,000/-, under section 68 of the Act, under

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

3. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in disallowing the loss of Rs. 70,59,688/-, claimed by the Appellant in the return of income, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in making an addition of Rs. 1,13,37,000/-, under section 68 of the Act, under

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

3. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in disallowing the loss of Rs. 70,59,688/-, claimed by the Appellant in the return of income, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in making an addition of Rs. 1,13,37,000/-, under section 68 of the Act, under

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

3. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in disallowing the loss of Rs. 70,59,688/-, claimed by the Appellant in the return of income, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Whether the learned Authorities below are justified in making an addition of Rs. 1,13,37,000/-, under section 68 of the Act, under