INCOMETAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SURENDRA NATH GUBBALA, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Us:

revised return of income on 29.03.2021, disclosing an income of Rs. 2,56,62,270/-. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment, and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act, dated 29.06.2021, was issued by the A.O. 3. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the A.O. observed that the assessee, during the subject year

KUMAR PAPPU SINGH,TANUKU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, , ELURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.270/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-2014) Sri Kumar Pappu Singh Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.23-3-26, Sundaram Nagar Income Tax, Sajjapuram Circle-1, Kks Towers, Tanuku Rr Pet, Eluru [Pan : Aeepp2496P] Andhra Pradesh (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

gain for the assessee was Rs.45,74,782/- which required to be considered for the addition u/s 56. Accordingly, the Ld.AR argued that the revision made by the Ld.Pr.CIT u/s 263 is erroneous and requested to quash the order passed by the Pr.CIT. 11. On the other hand, the Ld.DR submitted that the AO has not made any enquiry

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

revision order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT U/s. 263 is bad in law. Consequently the order passed by the Ld. AO U/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 is bad in law and void. 2. The Ld. AO is not at all correct in disallowing U/s. 40(a)(ia) the proportionate consideration paid to non-resident towards purchase of immovable property

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

revision order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT U/s. 263 is bad in law. Consequently the order passed by the Ld. AO U/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 is bad in law and void. 2. The Ld. AO is not at all correct in disallowing U/s. 40(a)(ia) the proportionate consideration paid to non-resident towards purchase of immovable property

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

revision order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT U/s. 263 is bad in law. Consequently the order passed by the Ld. AO U/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 is bad in law and void. 2. The Ld. AO is not at all correct in disallowing U/s. 40(a)(ia) the proportionate consideration paid to non-resident towards purchase of immovable property

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

revision order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT U/s. 263 is bad in law. Consequently the order passed by the Ld. AO U/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 is bad in law and void. 2. The Ld. AO is not at all correct in disallowing U/s. 40(a)(ia) the proportionate consideration paid to non-resident towards purchase of immovable property

YENDRAPU JOSEPH RATNA KUMAR, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.84 /Viz/2021 & 85/Viz/2021 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Year:2015-16) Yandrapu Joseph Ratna Kumar Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.50-104-3/4 Income Tax N.E.Layout, Seethammadhara Circle-4(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaapy8927E] Yandrapu Udaya Kumar D.No.50-104-3/4 N.E.Layout, Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaapy8929L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2021 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.09.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessees Against The Orders Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pcit), Visakhapatnam, Passed U/S 263 In Order No.Itba/Comf/1/17/2020-21/1031850881(1) Dated 28.03.2021 & Order No.Itba/Rev/F/Revs/2020-21/1031830844(1)

capital gains. After verification of details filed by the assessee, the assessment was completed accepting the income returned by an order dated 15.06.2017 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’). Subsequently, the Pr.CIT, Visakhapatnam has taken up the case for revision u/s 263

YANDRAPU UDAYA KUMAR,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.84 /Viz/2021 & 85/Viz/2021 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Year:2015-16) Yandrapu Joseph Ratna Kumar Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.50-104-3/4 Income Tax N.E.Layout, Seethammadhara Circle-4(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaapy8927E] Yandrapu Udaya Kumar D.No.50-104-3/4 N.E.Layout, Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaapy8929L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2021 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.09.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessees Against The Orders Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pcit), Visakhapatnam, Passed U/S 263 In Order No.Itba/Comf/1/17/2020-21/1031850881(1) Dated 28.03.2021 & Order No.Itba/Rev/F/Revs/2020-21/1031830844(1)

capital gains. After verification of details filed by the assessee, the assessment was completed accepting the income returned by an order dated 15.06.2017 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’). Subsequently, the Pr.CIT, Visakhapatnam has taken up the case for revision u/s 263

PUPPALA GOPI KRISHNA,GUNTUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

revised return of income of the assessee and assessed the capital gains. The Ld. AR therefore submitted that the Ld. AO has passed the assessment order in accordance with law and also complied with the CBDT Instruction No.20/2015, dated 29/12/2015. The Ld. AR further submitted that under these circumstances, the Ld. Pr. CIT has wrongly invoked the provisions of U/s

KARUMANCHI NALINI,GUNTUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), , GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.100/Viz/2021 & 101/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Dr. Karumanchi Nalini Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.10-3-37 Ward 1(3) Sambasiva Peta Guntur Guntur [Pan : Aaypn5886F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

263 had travelled beyond the directions of the Pr.CIT to disallow the claim of the deduction 3 ITA No.100/Viz/2021 & 101/Viz/2021 A.Y.2013-14 Dr.Karumanchi Nalini, Guntur u/s 54F of the Act amounting to Rs.55,45,275/- and passed assessment order without making inquiries or verification, which is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The Pr.CIT observed from the records

KARUMANCHI NALINI,GUNTUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.100/Viz/2021 & 101/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Dr. Karumanchi Nalini Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.10-3-37 Ward 1(3) Sambasiva Peta Guntur Guntur [Pan : Aaypn5886F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

263 had travelled beyond the directions of the Pr.CIT to disallow the claim of the deduction 3 ITA No.100/Viz/2021 & 101/Viz/2021 A.Y.2013-14 Dr.Karumanchi Nalini, Guntur u/s 54F of the Act amounting to Rs.55,45,275/- and passed assessment order without making inquiries or verification, which is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The Pr.CIT observed from the records

THE ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA vs. M/S. ABC ENGINEERING WORKERS,, VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Vs. M/S Abc Engineering Works Vijayawada Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.79/Viz/2013 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 210/Viz/2015 & 75/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2012-13) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar , Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] Dy.Cit, Circle-1(1) Vijayawada (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)

revision u/s 263 and allowability of deduction u/s 80(IA) of the Act. The deduction u/s 80(IA) is to be allowed from the profits of the industrial undertaking but not the profits and gains of the business. The scope of profits and gains of the business are wider than the income derived from the industrial activity. With regard

M/S ABC ENGINEERING WORKS,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE DCIT,, VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Vs. M/S Abc Engineering Works Vijayawada Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.79/Viz/2013 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 210/Viz/2015 & 75/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2012-13) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar , Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] Dy.Cit, Circle-1(1) Vijayawada (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)

revision u/s 263 and allowability of deduction u/s 80(IA) of the Act. The deduction u/s 80(IA) is to be allowed from the profits of the industrial undertaking but not the profits and gains of the business. The scope of profits and gains of the business are wider than the income derived from the industrial activity. With regard

M/S. ABC ENGINEERING WORKS,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE DY. CIT,, VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Vs. M/S Abc Engineering Works Vijayawada Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.79/Viz/2013 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 210/Viz/2015 & 75/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2012-13) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar , Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] Dy.Cit, Circle-1(1) Vijayawada (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)

revision u/s 263 and allowability of deduction u/s 80(IA) of the Act. The deduction u/s 80(IA) is to be allowed from the profits of the industrial undertaking but not the profits and gains of the business. The scope of profits and gains of the business are wider than the income derived from the industrial activity. With regard

THE ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA vs. M/S. ABC ENGINEERING WORKS,, VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Vs. M/S Abc Engineering Works Vijayawada Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.79/Viz/2013 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 210/Viz/2015 & 75/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2012-13) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar , Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] Dy.Cit, Circle-1(1) Vijayawada (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)

revision u/s 263 and allowability of deduction u/s 80(IA) of the Act. The deduction u/s 80(IA) is to be allowed from the profits of the industrial undertaking but not the profits and gains of the business. The scope of profits and gains of the business are wider than the income derived from the industrial activity. With regard

THE ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA vs. M/S. ABC ENGINEERING WORKS,, VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Vs. M/S Abc Engineering Works Vijayawada Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.79/Viz/2013 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 210/Viz/2015 & 75/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2012-13) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar , Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] Dy.Cit, Circle-1(1) Vijayawada (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)

revision u/s 263 and allowability of deduction u/s 80(IA) of the Act. The deduction u/s 80(IA) is to be allowed from the profits of the industrial undertaking but not the profits and gains of the business. The scope of profits and gains of the business are wider than the income derived from the industrial activity. With regard

CHEBOLU LAKSHMI,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.06/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2007-08) Smt. Chebolu Lakshmi Vs. Income Tax Officer F.No.3, City View Apartment Ward-2(1) Ramnagar Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Adapc6283A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 30.10.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2019 आदेश /O R D E R

revision u/s 263 and observed that the Assessing Officer (AO) has committed an error in computing the capital gains on sale

VANGA JAIN BABU,DEVARAPALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , TADEPALLIGUDEM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

revision order U/s. 263 of the Act considering the capital gains on the sale of land as short term capital

KONDA SRINIVASA REDDY,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), GUNTUR

In the result, all the 4 appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri S. Balakrishnanappeal No. Assessee Respondent A.Y 209/Viz/2024 Konda Srinivasa Income Tax Officer 2016-17 Reddy, Guntur, Ward 2(1) Pan:Aafhk9821E Guntur 216/Viz/2024 Veerareddy Gogula - Do - -Do- Guntur Pan:Byapg6481J - Do - 217/Viz/2024 Swarajyam -Do- Dontireddy Guntur Pan:Cmmpd3393K - Do - 218/Viz/2024 Vijaya Lakshmi -Do- Ravula, Guntur Pan:Baopr0163G

263 of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 18/12/2023. In response to the show cause notice, the assessee filed written submission on 12/01/2024. The learned Pr.CIT finally arrived to the conclusion that there is a transfer of land by the land owners in favour of the developer under the JDA cum irrevocable GPA, dated 18/03/2016 and consequently held that the assessment