ARABOLU VENKATA NAGA DEEPATHI REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, N. SATYARAMANUJAMM ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.178/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2010-11) Smt.Arabolu Venkata Naga Deepthi Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. By Power Of Attorney Holder (International Taxation) Smt. N.Satyaramanujam Visakhapatnam Flat No.403, Dhanna Apartments Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Atcpa6413A] (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

section 234A; 234B and 234C and the Id. CIT (Appeals) is not correct in confirming the levy/charge of interest. 3. The above grounds are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to one another. 4. The appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter, modify, delete all or any of the above grounds appeal. 3. Brief facts of the case are that

SANNIDHI SRI RAMACHANDRA MURTHY (HUF),RAJAHMUNDRY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 230/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-14) Sannidhi Sriramachandra Murthy (Huf) V. The Assistant Commissioner Of D.No. 42-10-30/31 Income Tax, Circle-1 Income Tax Office, Aayakar Bhavan Sree Ramachandra Murthy Nilayam Veerabhadrapuram Mangalavarapu Peta Rajahmundry-533105 Rajahmundry – 533101 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaxhs4350L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व / Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Ar राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व / Department Represented By : Dr. Satyasaai Rath, Cit(Dr)

sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G and 54H, be chargeable to income-tax under the head "Capital gains", and shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which the transfer took place. Page No. 7 I.T.A. No. 230/VIZ/2024 Sannidhi Sriramachandra Murthy (HUF) (1A

APPANA HARI NAGA VENKATA RAO,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ITO,, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleappana Hari Naga Venkat Rao, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(4), D.No. 15-32-7, Gokul Road, Visakhapatnam. Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Adopa 5287 G (Appellant) (Respondent)

gains" shall be computed by deducting from the full value of the consideration received or accruing, as a result of the transfer of the capital assets the following amounts, viz. (a) expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with such transfer; and (b) the cost of acquisition of the asset and the cost of any improvement thereto. 9. Section

VENKATARAM SPINNING MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), GUNTUR

In the result, assessee appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Balakrishnan. Sassessment Year: 2017-18 Venkataram Spinning Mills Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), Private Limited, Guntur. Guntur. Pan : Aafcv2151H. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Ar. Revenue By: Shri Ld.Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit- Dr. Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.02.2025

Section 3 of APCRDA, it would not make the area (the subject matter of the land) part of the territorial area of any municipality. Furthermore, the Notification itself has included various municipalities, towns, and areas as mentioned above. 11. The legislature has clearly provided for any agricultural land to be a capital asset should fall within the territorial jurisdiction

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SRI NARASIMHARAJU KANUMURI, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.267/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Narasimharaju Income Tax, Kanumuri, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aerpk2717F (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gains as their income and paid the subject taxes on the same, and hence, immunity under the “proviso” to Section 201 was available; and (v) that in any event the TDS provisions under Section 194H, if any, would be relevant for the payments to the resident intermediaries and no obligation was cast under Section

ADABALA MANMOHAN,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.135/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-12) Mr. Adabala Manmohan, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-International Taxation, Pan: Vpnao 1959 G Visakhapatnam. (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar

capital gains. The assessee has failed to deduct the tax at source, therefore the assessee is liable for payment tax and interest U/s. 201(1)/201(1A) of the 6 Act. The Ld. AO passed order U/s. 201(1)/201(1A) on 27/03/2018 which is after a lapse of five years from the end of the relevant assessment year. There

TEKI VENKATA RAMA RAO,,KAKINADA vs. THE ITO,, KAKINADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.151/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2012-13) Sri Teki Venkata Ramana Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.11-2-10 (International Taxation) Seshasai Street Kakinada Ramarao Peta Kakinada, E.G.Dist [Pan :Affpt6413G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri I.Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri V.Appala Raju, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2018 10.08.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

section 201 that such a charge can be created only when tax was deducted and not paid to the Government and not when tax was not deducted. 4. The Ld. AO is not at all correct in the computation of long term capital gains by adopting an estimated value of the property as on 01.04.1981 without reference to any comparable

NAGESH BABU VALIVETI,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNAL TAXATION), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Bles & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.9/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2012-13) Nagesh Babu Valiveti, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Vijayawada. Ward-International Taxation, Pan: Accpv7063J Vijayawada. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 30/04/2025 Pronouncement O R D E R

capital gains and duly paid taxes on the same. As a result, the assessee should not be treated as a defaulter, in light of the proviso to section 201(1) of the Act. 6. For the reasons mentioned above, any other grounds that may be raised during the course of the hearing, the appellant respectfully prays that the order passed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. RAVIKUMAR BURUGUPALLI, WEST GODAVARI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआईटीए. नं. / Ita No. 198/Viz/2025 निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year:2016-17) Dy. Cit (International Taxation) V. Ravikumar Burugupalli Income Tax Office Proprietor Sasi Fuel Infinity Towers, Ground Floor Sasi School, Main Road Sankaramatam Road Velivenu Post Visakhapatnam - 530016 West Godavari District – 534329 [Pan:Ajzpb2139H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) सी.ओ सं. / C.O. No. 38/Viz/2025 [आयकरअपीलसं.से उत्पन्न/I.T.A.No.198/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2016-17)] Ravikumar Burugupalli V. Dy. Cit (International Taxation) Proprietor Sasi Fuel Income Tax Office Sasi School, Main Road Infinity Towers, Ground Floor Velivenu Post Sankaramatam Road Visakhapatnam - 530016 West Godavari District – 534329 [Pan:Ajzpb2139H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Smt A. Aruna, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

1A) of the Act raising a demand of Rs.1,00,91,585/-. 3. On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) considering the proviso to Section 201(1) of the Act found that prima-facie the claim is admissible as he has complied with the provisions

ADISESHU GUNJI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.661/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12) Adiseshu Gunji Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.53-92-08, Chaitanya Nagar (International Taxation) Maddilapalem, Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aehpg5014K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.662/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12) Venkayamma Gunji Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.53-92-08, Chaitanya Nagar (International Taxation) Maddilapalem, Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aetpg1987Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Shri Suseel Kumar Agarwal, Ar अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellants By : प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri B.Satyanarayana Raju, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 05.04.2021 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.04.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per D.S.Sunder Singh: These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessees Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)],Hyderabad-10 In 2

capital transaction u/s 201(1A) 20.6% of delay (Rs.) gains (Rs.) 201(1A) is (Rs.) (Rs.) calculated 4,80,000 98,880 19.02.2011 26.03.2018 85 84,048 1,82,928 3. Against the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and argued that the assessee has not made the payment to the non- resident

VENKAYAMMA GUNJI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.661/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12) Adiseshu Gunji Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.53-92-08, Chaitanya Nagar (International Taxation) Maddilapalem, Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aehpg5014K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.662/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12) Venkayamma Gunji Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.53-92-08, Chaitanya Nagar (International Taxation) Maddilapalem, Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aetpg1987Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Shri Suseel Kumar Agarwal, Ar अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellants By : प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri B.Satyanarayana Raju, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 05.04.2021 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.04.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per D.S.Sunder Singh: These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessees Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)],Hyderabad-10 In 2

capital transaction u/s 201(1A) 20.6% of delay (Rs.) gains (Rs.) 201(1A) is (Rs.) (Rs.) calculated 4,80,000 98,880 19.02.2011 26.03.2018 85 84,048 1,82,928 3. Against the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and argued that the assessee has not made the payment to the non- resident

PONNAM BHAVANI,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Balakrishnan, S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.331 & 332/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15) Smt. Ponnam Bhavani Vs. Income Tax Officer Vijayawada (International Taxation) Pan:Ajzpp5085E Vijayawada (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 24/04/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 28/04/2025 आदेश/Order

1A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 were passed offered the capital gain to tax in the year of execution of sale deed. Thus, the learned AR has submitted that once the seller of the property offered the income to tax then, as per the 1st proviso to section

PONNAM BHAVANI,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Balakrishnan, S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.331 & 332/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15) Smt. Ponnam Bhavani Vs. Income Tax Officer Vijayawada (International Taxation) Pan:Ajzpp5085E Vijayawada (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 24/04/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 28/04/2025 आदेश/Order

1A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 were passed offered the capital gain to tax in the year of execution of sale deed. Thus, the learned AR has submitted that once the seller of the property offered the income to tax then, as per the 1st proviso to section

VISAKHA JILLA NAVA NIRMANA SAMITHI, ,NARSIPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC,, BENGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकरअपील सं./I.T.A.No.152/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2015-16) M/S Visakha Jilla Nava Nirmana Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Samithi Income Tax D.No.3-26, Sivarama Nilayam Circle-5(1) First Lane, Sarada Nagar Visakhapatnam Narsipatnam [Pan :Aaatv7396N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri B.Satyanaraya Raju, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2020 आदेश /O R D E R

capital gains on sale of property for a sale consideration of Rs.31,38,000/- from which the cost of development to the extent of Rs.7,31,016/- was claimed as deduction and the balance amount of Rs.24,06,984/- was invested in bank fixed deposits which is eligible for deduction u/s 11(1A)(a) of the Act. The assessee also

VOBILINENI SURYA PRASAD,,KAKINADA vs. THE DCIT(IT & TP),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.348/Viz/2016 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Vobilineni Surya Prasad Vs. Ddit (It & Tp) D.No.67-3-14/2 Visakhapatnam Kakinada East Godavari Dist. [Pan : Acopv9063E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

capital gains, education cess @2% and secondary and higher educational cess @1% and interest @1%p.m. and the details are as under : No. of months for Tax which interest u/s Interest u/s Amount deductible Total amount 201(1A) is payable 201(1A) @ 1% Paid (Rs.) @20.60% payable (Rs.) from April