BHEL LCC SOCIETY LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.732/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Bhel Lcc Society Ltd Vs. Dy.Cit Hyderabad Circle 8(1) Pan:Aaatb6430D Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Sri Sai Keerthana राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 01/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 04/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27/02/2025 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Arising From The Penalty Order Passed U/S 270A Of The I.T. Act For The A.Y.2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

8(1) PAN:AAATB6430D Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee by: CA Sri Sai Keerthana राज" व "ारा/Revenue by:: Shri Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr.AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 01/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 04/09/2025 आदेश/ORDER Per Vijay Pal Rao, Vice President This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27/02/2025

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

68 and assessed-as such, @ 60% tax irate as prescribed under provisions of section 115BBE of the IT Act.” In view of the detailed discussion above and the provisions of section 270A(9), I am satisfied that the assessee has indulged in under-reporting of income in consequence of mis-reporting of income, and accordingly, Penalty proceedings

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(1), HYDERABAD vs. VAISHNAVI BULLION PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, we uphold the addition of Rs

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

68 and assessed-as such, @ 60% tax irate as prescribed under provisions of section 115BBE of the IT Act.” In view of the detailed discussion above and the provisions of section 270A(9), I am satisfied that the assessee has indulged in under-reporting of income in consequence of mis-reporting of income, and accordingly, Penalty proceedings

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

68 and assessed-as such, @ 60% tax irate as prescribed under provisions of section 115BBE of the IT Act.” In view of the detailed discussion above and the provisions of section 270A(9), I am satisfied that the assessee has indulged in under-reporting of income in consequence of mis-reporting of income, and accordingly, Penalty proceedings

VAISHNAVI BULLION 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

68 and assessed-as such, @ 60% tax irate as prescribed under provisions of section 115BBE of the IT Act.” In view of the detailed discussion above and the provisions of section 270A(9), I am satisfied that the assessee has indulged in under-reporting of income in consequence of mis-reporting of income, and accordingly, Penalty proceedings

SUBBALAKSHMAMMA PINNAMA,THUMMALAGUNTA,TIRUPATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), TIRUPATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A).

68,940/- constituted under-reported income and initiated penalty proceedings under Section 270A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by issuing notice under Section 274 r.w.s. 270A. During the penalty proceedings, the assessee submitted explanations and stated that, the delay in filing the return was due to disputes with the developer, uncertainty regarding her share of property, applicability

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

SRI RAJA REDDY NALLA,WARANGAL vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

8. Per contra, the ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by the lower authorities. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. 9.1. Section 271AAC(1) of the Act provides as under : The Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals)] may, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act other than the provisions of section

PAPI REDDY ANKANNAGARI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT.,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1309 To 1312/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2019-20) Shri Papi Reddy Ankannagari, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Hyderabad. Tax, Pan: Adopa4689A Central Circle 3(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 12/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench : These Appeals Are Filed By Shri Papi Reddy Ankannagari (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Hyderabad-11 (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 28.11.2024, 02.12.2024, 29.11.2024 & 28.11.2024 Respectively For The A.Y. 2019-20. Since These Appeals Are Related To The Same Assessee & For The Same A.Y. 2019-20, They

8 (death of daughter and assessee’s own medical condition), the proceedings before lower authorities remained ex parte. The assessee has now filed additional evidence, which needs proper examination by the Ld. AO. On the first issue of Rs.70 lakhs under section 69A of the Act, we find merit in the submissions of the Ld. DR that there

PAPI REDDY ANKANNAGARI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1309 To 1312/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2019-20) Shri Papi Reddy Ankannagari, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Hyderabad. Tax, Pan: Adopa4689A Central Circle 3(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 12/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench : These Appeals Are Filed By Shri Papi Reddy Ankannagari (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Hyderabad-11 (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 28.11.2024, 02.12.2024, 29.11.2024 & 28.11.2024 Respectively For The A.Y. 2019-20. Since These Appeals Are Related To The Same Assessee & For The Same A.Y. 2019-20, They

8 (death of daughter and assessee’s own medical condition), the proceedings before lower authorities remained ex parte. The assessee has now filed additional evidence, which needs proper examination by the Ld. AO. On the first issue of Rs.70 lakhs under section 69A of the Act, we find merit in the submissions of the Ld. DR that there

PAPI REDDY ANKANNAGARI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1309 To 1312/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2019-20) Shri Papi Reddy Ankannagari, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Hyderabad. Tax, Pan: Adopa4689A Central Circle 3(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 12/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench : These Appeals Are Filed By Shri Papi Reddy Ankannagari (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Hyderabad-11 (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 28.11.2024, 02.12.2024, 29.11.2024 & 28.11.2024 Respectively For The A.Y. 2019-20. Since These Appeals Are Related To The Same Assessee & For The Same A.Y. 2019-20, They

8 (death of daughter and assessee’s own medical condition), the proceedings before lower authorities remained ex parte. The assessee has now filed additional evidence, which needs proper examination by the Ld. AO. On the first issue of Rs.70 lakhs under section 69A of the Act, we find merit in the submissions of the Ld. DR that there

PAPI REDDY ANKANNAGARI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1309 To 1312/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2019-20) Shri Papi Reddy Ankannagari, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Hyderabad. Tax, Pan: Adopa4689A Central Circle 3(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 12/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench : These Appeals Are Filed By Shri Papi Reddy Ankannagari (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Hyderabad-11 (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 28.11.2024, 02.12.2024, 29.11.2024 & 28.11.2024 Respectively For The A.Y. 2019-20. Since These Appeals Are Related To The Same Assessee & For The Same A.Y. 2019-20, They

8 (death of daughter and assessee’s own medical condition), the proceedings before lower authorities remained ex parte. The assessee has now filed additional evidence, which needs proper examination by the Ld. AO. On the first issue of Rs.70 lakhs under section 69A of the Act, we find merit in the submissions of the Ld. DR that there

CALLIDUSCLOUD (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE- 1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations given hereinabove

270A is bad in law.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, CallidusCloud India Private Limited, is engaged in the business of providing sales support, marketing and consulting services and software development to its group companies. The assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2021–22 on 19.02.2022, declaring total income

ALOK KUMAR SIMHARAJU,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(4), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us :

270A of the Act, dated.27.12.2019). The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us : “1. The Order made u/s 143(3) dated 27.12.2019 is contrary to facts and law. 2. The Assessing Officer erred in not considering the fact of Loss incurred during the current period and making the assumption of estimated average profit

NIRAJITA MITRA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-12(4), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

68 dated 03.01.2020 which was delay of 4 days. However, it is clearly mentioned in u/s 270AA sub section 2 that - "An application referred to in sub-section (1) shall be made within one month from the end of the month in which the order referred to in clause (a) of sub section- (1) has been received

HIGHRADIUS TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

270A of the Act, consequent to the above adjustment. 4.2 The Appellant submits that each ground of appeal are without prejudice to one another. 4.3 The Appellant desires to leave to amend, alter or to add, by deletion, substitution or otherwise, any or all of the above grounds of objections, at any time before or during the hearing

ALTIUX INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1006 To 1008/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Altiux Innovations (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Pan: Aalca9069R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sai Sarikonda, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2025 आदेश/Order

270A and penalty order passed u/s 271AAC(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 respectively for the A.Y.2020-21. Page 1 of 8 ITA Nos 1006 to 1008 of 2024 Altiux Innovations P Ltd 2. In the quantum appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld CIT (A) erred both in the circumstances of the case

ALTIUX INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1 (1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1006 To 1008/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Altiux Innovations (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Pan: Aalca9069R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sai Sarikonda, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2025 आदेश/Order

270A and penalty order passed u/s 271AAC(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 respectively for the A.Y.2020-21. Page 1 of 8 ITA Nos 1006 to 1008 of 2024 Altiux Innovations P Ltd 2. In the quantum appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld CIT (A) erred both in the circumstances of the case