DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. DSR INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

271D of the Act is required to be quashed. Therefore, respectfully, following the decision in the case of Rajareddy Nalla (supra), the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the ld.CIT(A) is liable to be quashed. Further, we do not find any infirmities in the order passed by the ld.CIT(A) and hence, the appeal of Revenue

D S R INFRASTRUCTUREPRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

271D of the Act is required to be quashed. Therefore, respectfully, following the decision in the case of Rajareddy Nalla (supra), the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the ld.CIT(A) is liable to be quashed. Further, we do not find any infirmities in the order passed by the ld.CIT(A) and hence, the appeal of Revenue

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. PIONEER BUILDERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

271D of the Act is required to be quashed. Therefore, respectfully, following the decision in the case of Rajareddy Nalla (supra), the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the ld.CIT(A) is liable to be quashed. Further, we do not find any infirmities in the order passed by the ld.CIT(A) and hence, the appeal of Revenue

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. PIONEER BUILDERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

271D of the Act is required to be quashed. Therefore, respectfully, following the decision in the case of Rajareddy Nalla (supra), the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the ld.CIT(A) is liable to be quashed. Further, we do not find any infirmities in the order passed by the ld.CIT(A) and hence, the appeal of Revenue

D S R INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

271D of the Act is required to be quashed. Therefore, respectfully, following the decision in the case of Rajareddy Nalla (supra), the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the ld.CIT(A) is liable to be quashed. Further, we do not find any infirmities in the order passed by the ld.CIT(A) and hence, the appeal of Revenue

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. PIONEER BUILDERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

271D of the Act is required to be quashed. Therefore, respectfully, following the decision in the case of Rajareddy Nalla (supra), the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the ld.CIT(A) is liable to be quashed. Further, we do not find any infirmities in the order passed by the ld.CIT(A) and hence, the appeal of Revenue

DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. DSR INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

271D of the Act is required to be quashed. Therefore, respectfully, following the decision in the case of Rajareddy Nalla (supra), the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the ld.CIT(A) is liable to be quashed. Further, we do not find any infirmities in the order passed by the ld.CIT(A) and hence, the appeal of Revenue

BALREDDY GADE,SECUNDERABAD vs. ADDL. CIT., CENTRAL RANGE-1, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.575 To 578/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14) Shri Balreddy Gade, Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Hyderabad. Central Range-1, Pan:Adepg7858D Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K C Devdas, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 28/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench :

68 of the Act, thereby losing its character as a ‘loan’ or ‘deposit’ within the meaning of Section 269SS, making the imposition of penalty under Section 271D legally unsustainable. 2

BALREDDY GADE,SECUNDERABAD vs. ADDL. CIT., CENTRAL RANGE-1, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.575 To 578/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14) Shri Balreddy Gade, Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Hyderabad. Central Range-1, Pan:Adepg7858D Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K C Devdas, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 28/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench :

68 of the Act, thereby losing its character as a ‘loan’ or ‘deposit’ within the meaning of Section 269SS, making the imposition of penalty under Section 271D legally unsustainable. 2

BALREDDY GADE,SECUNDERABAD vs. ADDL. CIT., CENTRAL RANGE-1, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.575 To 578/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14) Shri Balreddy Gade, Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Hyderabad. Central Range-1, Pan:Adepg7858D Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K C Devdas, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 28/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench :

68 of the Act, thereby losing its character as a ‘loan’ or ‘deposit’ within the meaning of Section 269SS, making the imposition of penalty under Section 271D legally unsustainable. 2

BALREDDY GADE,SECUNDERABAD vs. ADDL. CIT., CENTRAL RANGE-1, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.575 To 578/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14) Shri Balreddy Gade, Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Hyderabad. Central Range-1, Pan:Adepg7858D Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K C Devdas, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 28/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench :

68 of the Act, thereby losing its character as a ‘loan’ or ‘deposit’ within the meaning of Section 269SS, making the imposition of penalty under Section 271D legally unsustainable. 2

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, three appeals i

2)(b) of the Act, dated\n18/01/2024, the rectification order passed by the ACIT/CPC u/s 154\ndated 27/09/2022 becomes infructuous. In our considered view, the\nobservation of the learned CIT (A) in para 6.2.8 of his order is beyond the\nscope of powers of the CIT (A) because, the CIT (A) does not have any\npower to give any direction

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

2)(b) of the Act, dated\n18/01/2024, the rectification order passed by the ACIT/CPC u/s 154\ndated 27/09/2022 becomes infructuous. In our considered view, the\nobservation of the learned CIT (A) in para 6.2.8 of his order is beyond the\nscope of powers of the CIT (A) because, the CIT (A) does not have any\npower to give any direction

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

sections": [ "Sec. 143(1)", "Sec. 271D", "Sec. 154", "Sec. 250", "Sec. 11", "Sec. 12", "Sec. 10B", "Sec. 119(2)(b)", "Sec. 269SS", "Sec. 273B", "Sec. 68

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

2)(b) of the Act, dated\n18/01/2024, the rectification order passed by the ACIT/CPC u/s 154\ndated 27/09/2022 becomes infructuous. In our considered view, the\nobservation of the learned CIT (A) in para 6.2.8 of his order is beyond the\nscope of powers of the learned CIT (A) because, the CIT (A) does not have any\npower to give

ASRA AHMED ,HYDERABAD vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.156/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

2. The Ld.A.O. grossly erred in invoking the provisions of sec.153C of the I.T.Act without there being any incriminating material found belonging to the appellant during the course of search in the premises of third party. 3. The Ld.A.O ought to have appreciated the fact that the issuance of notice u/s 153C has to be done before the completion

SYED AHMED ZEESHANUDDIN,HYDERABAD vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.156/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

2. The Ld.A.O. grossly erred in invoking the provisions of sec.153C of the I.T.Act without there being any incriminating material found belonging to the appellant during the course of search in the premises of third party. 3. The Ld.A.O ought to have appreciated the fact that the issuance of notice u/s 153C has to be done before the completion

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

68 of the Act, and had held that the receipt was in the form of loan or advances and therefore, deemed it appropriate to initiate the proceedings under Section 269SS/ST r.w.s. 271D of the Act. 7. The ld. AR further submitted that once the Assessing Officer examined the issue u/s 269SS/ST of the Act, then the Assessing Officer must

JAYARAM BASANI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-15(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had sold an immovable property and the sale proceeds were received in cash amounting to Rs.13,63,000/-. On observation that the cash amounting to more than Rs.20,000/- was accepted in contravention to the provisions of section 269SS by the Assessing Officer, a show cause notice