DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GVA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DHAMTARI

6\nI.T.A.Nos. 137, 138 & 139/VIZ/2025\nI.T.A.Nos.221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited --\naccommodation entries is nothing but money laundering activity, which isa\npunishable offence under PMLA.\n11.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in allowing relief to the assessee, keeping\nin view of the fact that the assessee company had reduced its taxable profits, by\navailing

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GVA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DHAMTARI

6\nI.T.A.Nos.137, 138 & 139/VIZ/2025\nI.T.A.Nos.221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited --\naccommodation entries is nothing but money laundering activity, which isa\npunishable offence under PMLA.\n11.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in allowing relief to the assessee, keeping\nin view of the fact that the assessee company had reduced its taxable profits, by\navailing

GVA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

6\nI.T.A.Nos.137, 138 & 139/VIZ/2025\nI.T.A.Nos.221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited\naccommodation entries is nothing but money laundering activity, which isa\npunishable offence under PMLA.\n11.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in allowing relief to the assessee, keeping\nin view of the fact that the assessee company had reduced its taxable profits, by\navailing

GVA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

6\nI.T.A.Nos. 137, 138 & 139/VIZ/2025\nI.T.A.Nos.221, 222 & 223 /VIZ/2025\nM/s. GVA Industries Private Limited\naccommodation entries is nothing but money laundering activity, which isa\npunishable offence under PMLA.\n11. The Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in allowing relief to the assessee, keeping\nin view of the fact that the assessee company had reduced its taxable profits, by\navailing

WALTAIR TRADERS,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NEAC, DELHI

section 133(6) of the Act cannot be a valid ground\nfor considering the purchases as bogus. She also further

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DODDI ROOPA, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.413/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Smt. Doddi Roopa, Income Tax, Visakhapatnam. Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam. Pan: Atfpr7237N (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 Hearing: 15/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement:

purchases of Rs. 4,99,65,247/-, passed an order under section 148A(d) of the Act, dated 29/03/2023. Thereafter, the AO issued notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 29/03/2023, wherein the assessee was called upon to file her return of income in response to the same. 4. Thereafter, the AO issued notices under section 133(6

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, KAKINADA vs. SUDHA AGRO OIL AND CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED, G.RAGAMPETA

section 133(6) of the Act. The Ld. AO has also\nmentioned that the assessee failed to submit the notarized affidavit of the\nentity confirming the fact that all the cheques were issued by SRMUCS on\nits behalf against the purchases made by it from the assessee during the\nA.Y. 2015-16. Since the assessee has not discharged the onus

SRI RAJANI GOLD,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.162/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sri Rajani Gold V. Asst. Cit – Circle – 1(1) D.No. 11-49-336B Central Revenue Building Sivalayam Street, I Town Mg Road – 520001 Vijayawada – 520001 Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aacfs6675E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

133(6) of the Act noticed that assessee has deposited Specified Bank Notes (SBN) in the bank accounts during the demonetization period as follows: - Rajani Gold SBNs Deposits during Demonetisation Period Denominations SBNs S.No. Bank Branch A/c No. 500s 1000s Amount 1. Andhra Bank Satyanarayanapuram 50411100001200 37058 33789 52318000 2. Indian Overseas Bank Park Road

R.S. PABBLA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT.LTD.,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DY. CIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

bogus and fictitious and offered additional income of Rs. 1.51 crores for the A.Y. 2013-14 and Rs. 3.60 crores for A.Y. 2014-15 in the sworn deposition given by him on 21/09/2015. During the scrutiny proceedings, the AO called upon the assessee to substantiate the claim of sundry creditors to the tune of Rs. 6.46 crores shown as outstanding

R.S. PABBLA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT.LTD.,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DY. CIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

bogus and fictitious and offered additional income of Rs. 1.51 crores for the A.Y. 2013-14 and Rs. 3.60 crores for A.Y. 2014-15 in the sworn deposition given by him on 21/09/2015. During the scrutiny proceedings, the AO called upon the assessee to substantiate the claim of sundry creditors to the tune of Rs. 6.46 crores shown as outstanding