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

292C are clear and cast the onus of proving the genuineness or otherwise of the books on the assessee only. The provisions of the section read as under : “Where any books 'of account,- other: documents, money .... is found in the possession or control of any person in the course of survey u/s 133A, it may, in any proceedings under

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

292C are clear and cast the onus of proving the genuineness or otherwise of the books on the assessee only. The provisions of the section read as under : “Where any books 'of account,- other: documents, money .... is found in the possession or control of any person in the course of survey u/s 133A, it may, in any proceedings under

SKANDA INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

292C of the Income Tax Act create a rebuttable presumption that documents found during a search belong to the assessee and are true. Courts have consistently held that selective reliance on seized material is unjustified unless the contents are independently proved against the assessee. ITA.Nos.514 to 539/Hyd./2025, And ITA.Nos.308 to 311/Hyd./2025. 44 • In CIT v. Indeo

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SRI ADITYA HOMES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result the appeal I

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

section-4 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is fully satisfied without any uncertainty or vagueness, no tax can be levied. In 59 ITA.Nos.262 to 268/Hyd./2025, ITA.No.98/Hyd./2025 And C.O.Nos.9, 10 & 11/Hyd./2025 this regard, he relied upon decision of ITAT, Jabalpur Bench in the case of ACIT vs., Satyapal Wassan [2008] 5 DTR_TRIB

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.

292C of the Act, as per which the seized document, viz., Page 38 of Annexure A/JRFM/05 was to be presumed to be belonging to either Shri. Surender Jindal (supra) i.e. the owner of the laptop or M/s Jitender Roller Flour Mills, i.e. the searched concern in whose premises the laptop was found lying in the course of the search proceedings

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.

292C of the Act, as per which the seized document, viz., Page 38 of Annexure A/JRFM/05 was to be presumed to be belonging to either Shri. Surender Jindal (supra) i.e. the owner of the laptop or M/s Jitender Roller Flour Mills, i.e. the searched concern in whose premises the laptop was found lying in the course of the search proceedings

PURUSHOTHAM NAIDU LEKKALA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

68 of the Act, and unexplained expenditure / investment under Section 69C of the Act, on the basis of the seized material found during the course of search and challenged the additions made by the A.O. on the ground that, the loose papers found during the course of search with Shri G. Archan Kumar in his WhatsApp message

GIRIDHARI CONSTRUCTIONS,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

68,967/- TOTAL Rs.37,69,70,390/- 12. In appeal, the learned CIT (A), for the reasons stated in their appellate order dated 19.01.2024 allowed partial relief in respect of additions made towards suppression of sales and out of addition made by the ld. AO for six Asst. Years for Rs.37,69,70,390/-, has deleted Rs.22

GIRIDHARI CONSTRUCTIONS,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

68,967/- TOTAL Rs.37,69,70,390/- 12. In appeal, the learned CIT (A), for the reasons stated in their appellate order dated 19.01.2024 allowed partial relief in respect of additions made towards suppression of sales and out of addition made by the ld. AO for six Asst. Years for Rs.37,69,70,390/-, has deleted Rs.22

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. GIRIDHARI CONSTRUCTIONS, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

68,967/- TOTAL Rs.37,69,70,390/- 12. In appeal, the learned CIT (A), for the reasons stated in their appellate order dated 19.01.2024 allowed partial relief in respect of additions made towards suppression of sales and out of addition made by the ld. AO for six Asst. Years for Rs.37,69,70,390/-, has deleted Rs.22

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. GIRIDHARI CONSTRUCTIONS, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

68,967/- TOTAL Rs.37,69,70,390/- 12. In appeal, the learned CIT (A), for the reasons stated in their appellate order dated 19.01.2024 allowed partial relief in respect of additions made towards suppression of sales and out of addition made by the ld. AO for six Asst. Years for Rs.37,69,70,390/-, has deleted Rs.22

GIRIDHARI CONSTRUCTIONS,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

68,967/- TOTAL Rs.37,69,70,390/- 12. In appeal, the learned CIT (A), for the reasons stated in their appellate order dated 19.01.2024 allowed partial relief in respect of additions made towards suppression of sales and out of addition made by the ld. AO for six Asst. Years for Rs.37,69,70,390/-, has deleted Rs.22

GIRIDHARI CONSTRUCTIONS,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

68,967/- TOTAL Rs.37,69,70,390/- 12. In appeal, the learned CIT (A), for the reasons stated in their appellate order dated 19.01.2024 allowed partial relief in respect of additions made towards suppression of sales and out of addition made by the ld. AO for six Asst. Years for Rs.37,69,70,390/-, has deleted Rs.22

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. GIRIDHARI CONSTRUCTIONS, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

68,967/- TOTAL Rs.37,69,70,390/- 12. In appeal, the learned CIT (A), for the reasons stated in their appellate order dated 19.01.2024 allowed partial relief in respect of additions made towards suppression of sales and out of addition made by the ld. AO for six Asst. Years for Rs.37,69,70,390/-, has deleted Rs.22

GIRIDHARI CONSTRUCTIONS,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

68,967/- TOTAL Rs.37,69,70,390/- 12. In appeal, the learned CIT (A), for the reasons stated in their appellate order dated 19.01.2024 allowed partial relief in respect of additions made towards suppression of sales and out of addition made by the ld. AO for six Asst. Years for Rs.37,69,70,390/-, has deleted Rs.22

GIRIDHARI CONSTRUCTIONS,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

68,967/- TOTAL Rs.37,69,70,390/- 12. In appeal, the learned CIT (A), for the reasons stated in their appellate order dated 19.01.2024 allowed partial relief in respect of additions made towards suppression of sales and out of addition made by the ld. AO for six Asst. Years for Rs.37,69,70,390/-, has deleted Rs.22

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. GIRIDHARI CONSTRUCTIONS, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

68,967/- TOTAL Rs.37,69,70,390/- 12. In appeal, the learned CIT (A), for the reasons stated in their appellate order dated 19.01.2024 allowed partial relief in respect of additions made towards suppression of sales and out of addition made by the ld. AO for six Asst. Years for Rs.37,69,70,390/-, has deleted Rs.22

VSN AND JEEVAN INFRA DEVELOPERS, PERURU PANCHAYAT,TIRUPATHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, TIRUPATHI, TIRUPATHI

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.707/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10) Vsn & Jeevan Infra Vs. Dy.Cit Developers, Peruru Central Circle Panchayat, Tirupati Tirupati Pan:Aaifv3414B (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate H Srinivasulu राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Vsn & Jeevan Infra Developers (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Visakhapatnam (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 21.02.2017 For The A.Y 2009- 10. Page 1 Of 12

68 of the Act on account of a unsecured loan received by the assessee from Shri Jayadeva Naidu, and the third issue relates to a legal ground wherein the assessee has challenged the validity of the assessment proceedings. 8. As regards the addition of Rs. 1.80 crores on account of alleged on-money received from M.G. Brothers