VIDYAVATHI MANTHRAVADI,UNITED KINGDOM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(IT AND TP), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.292/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2013-14) Sivakama Sundar Manthravadi, Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax United Kingdom. (It & Tp), Pan: Avspm 1372 N Hyderabad. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.295/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Vidyavathi Manthravadi, Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax United Kingdom. (It & Tp), Pan: Avspm 1370 Q Hyderabad. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessees By : Ms. P. Chandini, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27/03/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 28/05/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan:

capital gain is long term or short term and the indexed cost of acquisition could be computed. Likewise in order to claim the indexed cost of improvement necessary documents in support of the improvements done and the expenditure incurred thereon have to be also maintained by the assessee. The next question is how to appropriate the sale consideration

SIVAKAMA SUNDAR MANTHRAVADI,UNITED KINGDOM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(IT AND TP), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.292/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2013-14) Sivakama Sundar Manthravadi, Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax United Kingdom. (It & Tp), Pan: Avspm 1372 N Hyderabad. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.295/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Vidyavathi Manthravadi, Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax United Kingdom. (It & Tp), Pan: Avspm 1370 Q Hyderabad. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessees By : Ms. P. Chandini, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27/03/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 28/05/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan:

capital gain is long term or short term and the indexed cost of acquisition could be computed. Likewise in order to claim the indexed cost of improvement necessary documents in support of the improvements done and the expenditure incurred thereon have to be also maintained by the assessee. The next question is how to appropriate the sale consideration

ARAVINDA BHUPATHIRAJU REP BY GPA HOLDER SRI KAR BAHADUR SRI RAJA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE (INTERNAL TAXATION), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. (It). No.262/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Aravinda Bhupathiraju Vs. Asst. Cit (International Taxation) Rep. By. Gpa Holder Income Tax Office, Infinity Towers, K.A.R. Bahadur Sri Raja Sankaramatam Road Falt No. 502, Sky Aditya Apartment Visakhapatnam- 530016 Gitams Road, Yendada Andhra Pradesh Visakhapatnam – 530045 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Bjopb0898P] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Smt A. Aruna, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

capital gains after adopting the value determined under section 50C of the Act, assessee does not have any capital gains

AKUNURI SAI AVINASH,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon‟Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon‟Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.42/Viz/2023 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2016-17) Akunuri Sai Avinash, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Rep. By Gpa Holder Dr. Akunuri Income Tax, Sai Babu, Circle (International Taxation), Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar प्रत्याथीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुनिाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26/03/2024 घोर्णाकीतारीख/Date Of : 12/04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan:

section 50C of the Act. Accordingly, the Ld. AO considered the stamp duty value of Rs. 63,89,000/- as the sale consideration and subjected the difference amount of Rs. 49,04,000/- to tax under the head „capital gains

MEKA RANGANAYAKAMMA,KRISHNA DISTRICT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

capital gains as per the provisions of section 48 of the Act in the condition where sale consideration is less than stamp value. But, the appellant did not follow the provisions of section 50C

YADLA SRINIVASA RAO,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2), , VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.78/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Yadla Srinivasa Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.20-04-190/7A Ward-3(2) Basavataraka Nagar Vijayawada Ayodhya Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Abfpy5447F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

50C of the Act, the AO has correctly computed the capital gains against the sale consideration of Rs.20,00,000/- after allowing indexed cost of acquisition at Rs.6,54,090/- and arrived at the long term capital gains of Rs.13,45,910/-. For the sake of clarity, the provisions of section

CHIGURUPATI RAJENDRA PRASAD,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), 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.202/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Chigurupati Rajendra Prasad Vs. Income Tax Officer Dr.No.32-41-47/28, Near Library Ward-2(2) Machavaram Vijayawada Vijayawada Pan : Abjpc1799A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

capital gains reckoning the provisions of section 50C. The assessee was also asked to justify his claim that there existed

VIJAYRATNA VEERA KUMAR,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), VISAKHAPATNAM

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

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

capital gains without applying the provisions of section 50C of the Act and thereafter issued a notice U/s. 143(2) of the Act. The assessee

VARAHALAMMA PYDI (LATE),VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri K Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. 348/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Varahalamma Pydi Late, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-4(2), Pan: Bjhpp9886J Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""थ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri I. Kama Sastry, Ar ""ाथ" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr

section 50C of the Act. Accordingly, the Ld. AO computed the Long Term Capital Gains at Rs. 6,74,80,333/-. Further

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VIJAYNAGAR INVESTMENT AND INFRA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.201/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2017-18) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vijaynagar Investment Income Tax & Infra Developers Private Central Circle-1, Limited, Visakhapatnam. Flat No. 403, 4Th Floor, Vijay Jyothi Arcade, Opp. Nhai Office, Hanumanthawaka, Visakhapatnam-530043. Pan: Aadcv 9521 F (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

capital gains. Since the assessee did not furnish any agreement, as claimed by the assessee, with respect to the said property, the Ld/ AO added back Rs. 37,53,540/- to the total income of the assessee as per the provisions of section 50C

VIJAYA DURGA PENUMALA,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.249/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17) Vijaya Durga Penumala, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 74-8-20, Siri Apartments-2, Ward-2(1), Prakash Nagar, Rajahmundry, Rajahmundry. Andhra Pradesh – 533103. Pan: Cxdpp1606F (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 31/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

capital gains on the development agreement to be Rs. 54,03,020/-. The Ld. AO also observed that the assessee and her husband have transferred 490.26 sq yds to M/s. Bhavya Builders and the fair market value of the land is at Rs. 18,000/- per sq yd and therefore the value of the land transferred worked

PAVANCHANDRA CHITFUNDS PVT LTD,GUNTUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), GUNTUR

Bench: Us:

capital gain arising on the transfer of the same to the five parties, therefore, we find 13 Pavanchandra Chit Funds Pvt.Ltd. no infirmity in the determining of the same under Section 50C

KALPANA TALUKDAR L/R OF (LATE) UTPAL TALUKDAR,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), VIJAYAWADA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.23/Viz/2024 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Kalpana Talukdar Vs. Income Tax Officer L/R Of (Late) Utpal Talukdar Ward-3(5) Lotus Land Mark Vijayawada Plot No.1, Sector-4 Road No.4, Ayodhya Nagar (Po) Gandhi Nagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Apppt1112G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

section 50C of the Act, on which the assessee is liable for payment of capital gain tax. The Assessing Officer

SUBBA RAO ANGIREKULA,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.244/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Subba Rao Angirekula, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Vijayawada. Ward-2(3), Pan: Autpa2480M Vijayawada. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Ms. Sandhya Samudrala, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/08/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 23/08/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

capital gains U/s. 50C of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. 5. On appeal, since there was no response from the assessee to the hearing notices issued with regard to the assessee’s appeal, the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC passed ex-parte order and dismissed

NARRA GANGA DEVI,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 243/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Narra Ganga Devi, Vs. Income Tax Officer,] Vijayawada. Ward-2(3), Pan: Anwpn8051F Vijayawada. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Ms. Sandhya Samudrala, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/08/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 14/08/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

capital gains U/s. 50C of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. On appeal, since there was no response from the assessee to the hearing notices issued with regard to the assessee’s appeal, the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC passed ex-parte order and dismissed

THE ITO, WARD-1, , TENALI vs. JASTI LAKSHMAIAH, TENALI

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161 & 162/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Koganti Vijaya Kumari Ward-1, Tenali. L/R Of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Tenali, Guntur Dist. Pan: Clwps0224B (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.163 & 164/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Jasti Lakshmaiah, Ward-1, Tenali. Tenali, Guntur District. Pan: Agapj3292P (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri I Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: These Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guntur

Capital Gains [“LTCG”] of the assessee for his 25% share was not admitted by filing the return of income. Thereafter, the proceedings U/s. 147 of the Act was initiated with the prior approval of the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax [“Ld. Pr. CIT”]. Subsequently, the notice U/s. 148 of the Act was issued and served on the assessee

ITO, WARD-1, , TENALI vs. SMT KOGANTI VIJAYA KUMARI L/H OF LATE KOGANTI BHAVANI SANKAR, GUNTUR

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161 & 162/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Koganti Vijaya Kumari Ward-1, Tenali. L/R Of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Tenali, Guntur Dist. Pan: Clwps0224B (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.163 & 164/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Jasti Lakshmaiah, Ward-1, Tenali. Tenali, Guntur District. Pan: Agapj3292P (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri I Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: These Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guntur

Capital Gains [“LTCG”] of the assessee for his 25% share was not admitted by filing the return of income. Thereafter, the proceedings U/s. 147 of the Act was initiated with the prior approval of the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax [“Ld. Pr. CIT”]. Subsequently, the notice U/s. 148 of the Act was issued and served on the assessee

THE ITO, WARD-1, , TENALI vs. SMT KOGANTI VIJAYA KUMARI L/H OF LATE KOGANTI BHAVANI SANKAR, TENALI

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161 & 162/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Koganti Vijaya Kumari Ward-1, Tenali. L/R Of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Tenali, Guntur Dist. Pan: Clwps0224B (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.163 & 164/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Jasti Lakshmaiah, Ward-1, Tenali. Tenali, Guntur District. Pan: Agapj3292P (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri I Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: These Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guntur

Capital Gains [“LTCG”] of the assessee for his 25% share was not admitted by filing the return of income. Thereafter, the proceedings U/s. 147 of the Act was initiated with the prior approval of the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax [“Ld. Pr. CIT”]. Subsequently, the notice U/s. 148 of the Act was issued and served on the assessee

THE ITO, WARD-1, , TENALI vs. JASTI LAKSHMAIAH, TENALI

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161 & 162/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Koganti Vijaya Kumari Ward-1, Tenali. L/R Of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Tenali, Guntur Dist. Pan: Clwps0224B (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.163 & 164/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Jasti Lakshmaiah, Ward-1, Tenali. Tenali, Guntur District. Pan: Agapj3292P (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri I Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: These Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guntur

Capital Gains [“LTCG”] of the assessee for his 25% share was not admitted by filing the return of income. Thereafter, the proceedings U/s. 147 of the Act was initiated with the prior approval of the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax [“Ld. Pr. CIT”]. Subsequently, the notice U/s. 148 of the Act was issued and served on the assessee