NIKHIL CONSTRUCTIONS, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2), , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

4 accounts and the other documentary evidence called for. After examining the details submitted by the assessee, the Ld. AO noticed that the assessee debited P & L Account with an amount of Rs. 50,38,500/- under the head ‘Direct Expenses’ towards site cost, out of which an amount of Rs. 30,23,140/- was shown under the head ‘closing

NIKHIL CONSTRUCTIONS, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

4 accounts and the other documentary evidence called for. After examining the details submitted by the assessee, the Ld. AO noticed that the assessee debited P & L Account with an amount of Rs. 50,38,500/- under the head ‘Direct Expenses’ towards site cost, out of which an amount of Rs. 30,23,140/- was shown under the head ‘closing

NIKHIL CONSTRUCTIONS, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

4 accounts and the other documentary evidence called for. After examining the details submitted by the assessee, the Ld. AO noticed that the assessee debited P & L Account with an amount of Rs. 50,38,500/- under the head ‘Direct Expenses’ towards site cost, out of which an amount of Rs. 30,23,140/- was shown under the head ‘closing

NIKHIL CONSTRUCTIONS,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

4 accounts and the other documentary evidence called for. After examining the details submitted by the assessee, the Ld. AO noticed that the assessee debited P & L Account with an amount of Rs. 50,38,500/- under the head ‘Direct Expenses’ towards site cost, out of which an amount of Rs. 30,23,140/- was shown under the head ‘closing

VIVEK INDUSTRIES,VIJAYAWADA vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.133/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19) Vivek Industries, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 8-1, Kamayyathopu Kanuru, Ward-2(3), Vijayawada. Vijayawada. Pan: Aanfm5215A (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 20/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm:

54F and 54EC of the I.T. Act. The learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) ought to have observed the fact that the capital gain was admitted and assessed in the assessment of the members of the AOP and, therefore, cannot be assessed in the assessment of the firm. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) ought to have considered