DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SHRI APPARAO MUKKAMALA, USA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed, while for the cross-objection filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI BALAKRISHNAN. S, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

capital gains (LTCG) on sale of shares of M/s Sunbeam Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. The return of income filed by the assessee was initially processed as such under section 143(1) of the Act. 3. On 26.02.2019, search and seizure proceedings were conducted in the case of M/s Sandhya Hotels Pvt. Ltd. During the course of the search proceedings, a copy

VIJAY SPINNING MILLS LIMITED,KRISHNA DISTRICT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.181/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Vijay Spinning Mills Ltd., Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of 5-111-10, Vsm Quarters Income Tax Ganguru, Penamaluru Mandal Circle-1(1) Krishna Dist. Vijayawada [Pan : Aaacv7518B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : None प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 07.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Dt. Of Pronouncement : 21.04.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Vide Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1044219637(1) Dated 28.07.2022 Arising Out Of The Orders Passed U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “Act”) Dated 26.03.2022 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2013-14. 2

section 275(1)(a) of the Act and therefore, barred by limitation. 6. The Ld.AO has erred by levying penalty on the additions arising out of difference in opinions. 7. The Ld.AO has erred by levying penalty on the addition of Rs.1,86,98,968/- despite of the fact the addition is made merely due to difference in opinion

NEKKANTI SEA FOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

275 ITR 284 (Guj).\n7. Ld.AR also argued that the in the assessee's own case in ITA No.\n156/VIZ/2021 dated 06.06.2022 this bench has allowed the appeal of the\nassessee by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of\nCIT v Meghalaya Steel Ltd., [ 2016] 383 ITR 217 (SC), he therefore submitted\nthat

RAMA RAO KARNAM,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,RANGE-4, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.141/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Mr.Rama Rao Karanam Vs. Joint Commissioner Of 4-4 Chandrampalem, Durga Nagar Income Tax Madhurawada Range-4 Pothinamallayapalem S.O. Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam Pan : [Bcppk19929Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri C.Subrahmanyam, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 12.07.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.08.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Vide Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1043662508(1) Dated 29.06.2022 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, An Individual, Filed His Original Return Of Income For The A.Y.2017-18 On 28.03.2019, Declaring Total Income At Rs.3,20,230/-. During The Course Of Assessment

275(1)(c) of the IT Act, therefore, the impugned order has no legal validity in the eyes of law, hence, liable to be quashed. But during the course of proceedings, the Ld.AR withdrew the additional ground filed as not pressed, hence, the addtional ground filed by the assessee is dismissed in-liminie , as not pressed. 6. All the grounds