SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

50C of the Act. We, thus, in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, are of a firm conviction that the nexus between the seized material and the assessee’s land transaction stands established on record. 13. Apart from that, we find that the satisfaction note prepared by the AO of the searched person clearly records that the seized material revealed

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

50C of the Act. We, thus, in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, are of a firm conviction that the nexus between the seized material and the assessee’s land transaction stands established on record. 13. Apart from that, we find that the satisfaction note prepared by the AO of the searched person clearly records that the seized material revealed

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

50C of the Act. We, thus, in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, are of a firm conviction that the nexus between the seized material and the assessee’s land transaction stands established on record. 13. Apart from that, we find that the satisfaction note prepared by the AO of the searched person clearly records that the seized material revealed

CHANDRALOK HOTELS LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2011-12 Chandra Lok Hotels Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaccc 9912 A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue By: Shri Rajat Mitra Date Of Hearing: 19/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/08/2021

1. The order of the ld. CIT(A), Hyderabad is erroneous both on facts and in law. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in dismissing the appeal. :- 2 -: Chandra Lok Hotels Ltd., Hyderabad. 3. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated. the fact that the provisions of section 50C of the Act would not apply in the appellant

SHYAMPRASAD REDDY GADDAM,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 196/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shyamprasad Reddy Vs. Dcit, Gaddam, Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aetpg9117P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/10/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)- 11, Hyderabad, Dated 02/02/2004, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 144 R.W.S 153A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”), Dated 12/12/2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2 Shyamprasad Reddy Gaddam Vs. Dcit

50C r.w.s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act, which, thereafter, on appeal, was sustained by the CIT(A) under Section 69C of the Act. On appeal, the Tribunal had observed that as the CIT(A) had not issued any show cause notice to the assessee for making the addition under Section 69C of the Act, therefore

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. L.RAJALAKSHMI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1678, 1679 & 1680/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. L.Rajalakshmi, Hyderabad अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Afgpr3011K …..

section 50C of the Act. 6. The assessee may add, alter or modify any other point to the Grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal”. 8. The appeals for assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 are filed after delay of 68 days. The assessee has filed separate affidavits

L.RAJALAKSHMI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1678, 1679 & 1680/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. L.Rajalakshmi, Hyderabad अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Afgpr3011K …..

section 50C of the Act. 6. The assessee may add, alter or modify any other point to the Grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal”. 8. The appeals for assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 are filed after delay of 68 days. The assessee has filed separate affidavits

L.RAJALAKSHMI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1678, 1679 & 1680/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. L.Rajalakshmi, Hyderabad अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Afgpr3011K …..

section 50C of the Act. 6. The assessee may add, alter or modify any other point to the Grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal”. 8. The appeals for assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 are filed after delay of 68 days. The assessee has filed separate affidavits

L.RAJALAKSHMI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1678, 1679 & 1680/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. L.Rajalakshmi, Hyderabad अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Afgpr3011K …..

section 50C of the Act. 6. The assessee may add, alter or modify any other point to the Grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal”. 8. The appeals for assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 are filed after delay of 68 days. The assessee has filed separate affidavits

JUSTICE. B.SUBASHAN REDDY (HUF),HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

1), HYDERABAD Smt. B. Ratna, HYDERABAD 1681/Hyd/2018 2007-08 [PAN: AFUPB6994H] For Assessee : Shri A.Srinivas, AR For Revenue : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, DR Date of Hearing : 02-03-2020 Date of Pronouncement : 22-07-2020 O R D E R These appeals are filed by Shri B. Subhashan Reddy (HUF) and Smt. B. Ratna against the order

SMT.B.RATNA ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

1), HYDERABAD Smt. B. Ratna, HYDERABAD 1681/Hyd/2018 2007-08 [PAN: AFUPB6994H] For Assessee : Shri A.Srinivas, AR For Revenue : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, DR Date of Hearing : 02-03-2020 Date of Pronouncement : 22-07-2020 O R D E R These appeals are filed by Shri B. Subhashan Reddy (HUF) and Smt. B. Ratna against the order

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. PRAKASH NIMMAGADDA, HYDERABAD, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.974/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy.Cit Vs. Shri Prakash Nimmagadda Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acbpn4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/12/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order, Dated 20/03/2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-9, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:

68. 8. All the three companies which allotted shares to the assessee are not start-up companies and they are into operation for about 3 years and on own admission earned huge sums on Page 9 of 43 ITA No 974 of 2017 Prakash Nimmagadda account of transfer of land on 18/04/2007. Therefore, the net worth of the three companies

N JAIDEEP REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

68 taxmann.com 29, he submitted that the Tribunal in the said decision has held that where a method has been prescribed by the Legislature, that method alone shall be followed for computation of the fair market value. 19. He submitted that the decision of Hon'ble A.P. High Court in the case of Gopaldas Bhadruka reported

K VIJAYA BHASKAR REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

68 taxmann.com 29, he submitted that the Tribunal in the said decision has held that where a method has been prescribed by the Legislature, that method alone shall be followed for computation of the fair market value. 19. He submitted that the decision of Hon'ble A.P. High Court in the case of Gopaldas Bhadruka reported

K LAXMA REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

68 taxmann.com 29, he submitted that the Tribunal in the said decision has held that where a method has been prescribed by the Legislature, that method alone shall be followed for computation of the fair market value. 19. He submitted that the decision of Hon'ble A.P. High Court in the case of Gopaldas Bhadruka reported

N JAIVEER REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

68 taxmann.com 29, he submitted that the Tribunal in the said decision has held that where a method has been prescribed by the Legislature, that method alone shall be followed for computation of the fair market value. 19. He submitted that the decision of Hon'ble A.P. High Court in the case of Gopaldas Bhadruka reported

ITO, WARD-5(3),, HYDERABAD vs. SHRI BRIJ GOPAL P SHAH, HUF,, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 50C was considered in the assessment whereas it was neither raised nor considered in the assessment order. 2 (a) The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the claim of deduction u/s 54F is merely academic in nature without realizing that he ought to have adjudicated on the ground raised. (b) The learned CIT(A) erred

ITO, WARD-5(3),, HYDERABAD vs. SHRI KRISHNA KUMAR D SHAH, HUF, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 50C was considered in the assessment whereas it was neither raised nor considered in the assessment order. 2 (a) The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the claim of deduction u/s 54F is merely academic in nature without realizing that he ought to have adjudicated on the ground raised. (b) The learned CIT(A) erred

ITO, WARD-14(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. AMJAD KHAN, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2010-11 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Amjad Khan, Ward-14(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Atgpk 7821 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad Revenue By: Shri Phani Raju, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04/02/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 13/02/2019

1,68,60,000/-. 3. The A.O observed that the assessee along with Sri Imran Khan acquired the property vide registered AGPA No.3406/2007 dated 17/09/2007 for an mount of Rs. 46,66,666/- and since the property was held for a period of less than three years, the gains arising from the sale is short term capital gains. He therefore