SUKHIBHAVA BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KUKATPALLY vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 4(1), VISHAKAPTANAM

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.239/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Sukhibhava Builders & Developers Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd Income Tax H.No.Mig-111, Ground Floor Circle-4(1) Road No.1, Kphp Colony Visakhapatnam Kukatpally, Hyderabad [Pan : Aancs3916K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

condone the delay in the interest of justice and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 engaged in the business of construction of apartments, filed it’s return of income for the A.Y.2012-13 on 01.10.2012, declaring total income of Rs.26,25,930/-. Subsequently, the case

ARIMILLI RAMA KRISHNA,WEST GODAVARI DIST vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

dividend within the meaning of section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act 1961. In these circumstances the ratio of the case cite by the appellant is not applicable. There is no other reason as to why the provisions of section 2(22)(e) are not attracted. As such the appellant has failed to establish that the provisions

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)

deemed to have been considered in estimation of income, thus, argued that once the income is estimated, no separate addition is required to be made on partners’ capital account. 5.1. With regard to the insurance claim receipts and scrap sales, the Ld.AR submitted that both are business receipts which are inter linked to the expenditure incurred, hence, no separate addition

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)

deemed to have been considered in estimation of income, thus, argued that once the income is estimated, no separate addition is required to be made on partners’ capital account. 5.1. With regard to the insurance claim receipts and scrap sales, the Ld.AR submitted that both are business receipts which are inter linked to the expenditure incurred, hence, no separate addition

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)

deemed to have been considered in estimation of income, thus, argued that once the income is estimated, no separate addition is required to be made on partners’ capital account. 5.1. With regard to the insurance claim receipts and scrap sales, the Ld.AR submitted that both are business receipts which are inter linked to the expenditure incurred, hence, no separate addition

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)

deemed to have been considered in estimation of income, thus, argued that once the income is estimated, no separate addition is required to be made on partners’ capital account. 5.1. With regard to the insurance claim receipts and scrap sales, the Ld.AR submitted that both are business receipts which are inter linked to the expenditure incurred, hence, no separate addition

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)

deemed to have been considered in estimation of income, thus, argued that once the income is estimated, no separate addition is required to be made on partners’ capital account. 5.1. With regard to the insurance claim receipts and scrap sales, the Ld.AR submitted that both are business receipts which are inter linked to the expenditure incurred, hence, no separate addition

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , RAJAHMUNDRY vs. GMP INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.524-528/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Respectively) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Gmp Infrastructure Income Tax Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-1 D.No.145/A, Raod No-10 Rajahmundry Prasashan Nagar Jubilee Hills Hyderabad [Pan : Aadcg7123L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection Nos.52-56/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.Nos.524-528/Viz/2018 Respectively) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Respectively) M/S Gmp Infrastructure Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax D.No.145/A, Raod No-10 Central Circle-1 Prasashan Nagar Rajahmundry Jubilee Hills Hyderabad [Pan : Aadcg7123L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

deemed dividend". This view has been rendered by Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s Redington (India) Ltd. Vs. The Addl, CIT, Company Range-V, Chennai in T.C.A.No. 520 of 216 and CIT, Central-1, Chennal Vs Chettinad Logistics (P) Ltd.[2017] 80 taxmann. Com 221 (Madras) and Hon'ble ITAT (Vizag) in the case of D.Veerabhadhra

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , RAJAHMUNDRY vs. GMP INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.524-528/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Respectively) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Gmp Infrastructure Income Tax Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-1 D.No.145/A, Raod No-10 Rajahmundry Prasashan Nagar Jubilee Hills Hyderabad [Pan : Aadcg7123L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection Nos.52-56/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.Nos.524-528/Viz/2018 Respectively) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Respectively) M/S Gmp Infrastructure Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax D.No.145/A, Raod No-10 Central Circle-1 Prasashan Nagar Rajahmundry Jubilee Hills Hyderabad [Pan : Aadcg7123L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

deemed dividend". This view has been rendered by Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s Redington (India) Ltd. Vs. The Addl, CIT, Company Range-V, Chennai in T.C.A.No. 520 of 216 and CIT, Central-1, Chennal Vs Chettinad Logistics (P) Ltd.[2017] 80 taxmann. Com 221 (Madras) and Hon'ble ITAT (Vizag) in the case of D.Veerabhadhra

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , RAJAHMUNDRY vs. GMP INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.524-528/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Respectively) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Gmp Infrastructure Income Tax Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-1 D.No.145/A, Raod No-10 Rajahmundry Prasashan Nagar Jubilee Hills Hyderabad [Pan : Aadcg7123L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection Nos.52-56/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.Nos.524-528/Viz/2018 Respectively) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Respectively) M/S Gmp Infrastructure Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax D.No.145/A, Raod No-10 Central Circle-1 Prasashan Nagar Rajahmundry Jubilee Hills Hyderabad [Pan : Aadcg7123L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

deemed dividend". This view has been rendered by Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s Redington (India) Ltd. Vs. The Addl, CIT, Company Range-V, Chennai in T.C.A.No. 520 of 216 and CIT, Central-1, Chennal Vs Chettinad Logistics (P) Ltd.[2017] 80 taxmann. Com 221 (Madras) and Hon'ble ITAT (Vizag) in the case of D.Veerabhadhra

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , RAJAHMUNDRY vs. GMP INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.524-528/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Respectively) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Gmp Infrastructure Income Tax Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-1 D.No.145/A, Raod No-10 Rajahmundry Prasashan Nagar Jubilee Hills Hyderabad [Pan : Aadcg7123L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection Nos.52-56/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.Nos.524-528/Viz/2018 Respectively) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Respectively) M/S Gmp Infrastructure Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax D.No.145/A, Raod No-10 Central Circle-1 Prasashan Nagar Rajahmundry Jubilee Hills Hyderabad [Pan : Aadcg7123L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

deemed dividend". This view has been rendered by Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s Redington (India) Ltd. Vs. The Addl, CIT, Company Range-V, Chennai in T.C.A.No. 520 of 216 and CIT, Central-1, Chennal Vs Chettinad Logistics (P) Ltd.[2017] 80 taxmann. Com 221 (Madras) and Hon'ble ITAT (Vizag) in the case of D.Veerabhadhra

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. GMP INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.524-528/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Respectively) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Gmp Infrastructure Income Tax Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-1 D.No.145/A, Raod No-10 Rajahmundry Prasashan Nagar Jubilee Hills Hyderabad [Pan : Aadcg7123L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection Nos.52-56/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.Nos.524-528/Viz/2018 Respectively) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Respectively) M/S Gmp Infrastructure Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax D.No.145/A, Raod No-10 Central Circle-1 Prasashan Nagar Rajahmundry Jubilee Hills Hyderabad [Pan : Aadcg7123L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

deemed dividend". This view has been rendered by Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s Redington (India) Ltd. Vs. The Addl, CIT, Company Range-V, Chennai in T.C.A.No. 520 of 216 and CIT, Central-1, Chennal Vs Chettinad Logistics (P) Ltd.[2017] 80 taxmann. Com 221 (Madras) and Hon'ble ITAT (Vizag) in the case of D.Veerabhadhra

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)., GUNTUR vs. TRANSSTROY(INDIA)LTD.,, GUNTUR

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.162 & 163/Viz/2015, 470/Viz/2016, 509/Viz/2017 & 193/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2009-10, 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Transstroy (India) Ltd. Income Tax Guntur Circle-2(1) Guntur [Pan : Aabct4226B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.193/Viz/2015, 430/Viz/2016, 529/Viz/2017 & 248/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively) M/S Transstroy (India) Ltd. Asst.Commissioner Of Guntur Income Tax Circle-2(1) [Pan : Aabct4226B] Guntur (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri T.Chaitanya Kumar, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 07.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2019

condone the delay. 3. After hearing the both the parties we are of the view that the reasons given by the AO for delay in filing the appeal are neither convincing nor satisfactory. The AO has to explain the reasons for delay on day to day 3 I.T.A. No.162 & 163/Viz/2015, 470/Viz/2016, 509/Viz/2017 and 193/Viz/2018 and I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2015, 430/Viz/2016, 529/Viz/2017 & 248/Viz/2018

TRANSSTROY(INDIA)LIMITED,,GUNTUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1),, GUNTUR

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.162 & 163/Viz/2015, 470/Viz/2016, 509/Viz/2017 & 193/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2009-10, 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Transstroy (India) Ltd. Income Tax Guntur Circle-2(1) Guntur [Pan : Aabct4226B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.193/Viz/2015, 430/Viz/2016, 529/Viz/2017 & 248/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively) M/S Transstroy (India) Ltd. Asst.Commissioner Of Guntur Income Tax Circle-2(1) [Pan : Aabct4226B] Guntur (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri T.Chaitanya Kumar, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 07.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2019

condone the delay. 3. After hearing the both the parties we are of the view that the reasons given by the AO for delay in filing the appeal are neither convincing nor satisfactory. The AO has to explain the reasons for delay on day to day 3 I.T.A. No.162 & 163/Viz/2015, 470/Viz/2016, 509/Viz/2017 and 193/Viz/2018 and I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2015, 430/Viz/2016, 529/Viz/2017 & 248/Viz/2018

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1),, GUNTUR vs. TRANSSTORY (INDIA) LIMITED,, GUNTUR

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.162 & 163/Viz/2015, 470/Viz/2016, 509/Viz/2017 & 193/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2009-10, 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Transstroy (India) Ltd. Income Tax Guntur Circle-2(1) Guntur [Pan : Aabct4226B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.193/Viz/2015, 430/Viz/2016, 529/Viz/2017 & 248/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively) M/S Transstroy (India) Ltd. Asst.Commissioner Of Guntur Income Tax Circle-2(1) [Pan : Aabct4226B] Guntur (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri T.Chaitanya Kumar, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 07.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2019

condone the delay. 3. After hearing the both the parties we are of the view that the reasons given by the AO for delay in filing the appeal are neither convincing nor satisfactory. The AO has to explain the reasons for delay on day to day 3 I.T.A. No.162 & 163/Viz/2015, 470/Viz/2016, 509/Viz/2017 and 193/Viz/2018 and I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2015, 430/Viz/2016, 529/Viz/2017 & 248/Viz/2018

THE ACIT,, GUNTUR vs. M/S. TRANSSTORY (INDIA) LTD., GUNTUR

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.162 & 163/Viz/2015, 470/Viz/2016, 509/Viz/2017 & 193/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2009-10, 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Transstroy (India) Ltd. Income Tax Guntur Circle-2(1) Guntur [Pan : Aabct4226B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.193/Viz/2015, 430/Viz/2016, 529/Viz/2017 & 248/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively) M/S Transstroy (India) Ltd. Asst.Commissioner Of Guntur Income Tax Circle-2(1) [Pan : Aabct4226B] Guntur (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri T.Chaitanya Kumar, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 07.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2019

condone the delay. 3. After hearing the both the parties we are of the view that the reasons given by the AO for delay in filing the appeal are neither convincing nor satisfactory. The AO has to explain the reasons for delay on day to day 3 I.T.A. No.162 & 163/Viz/2015, 470/Viz/2016, 509/Viz/2017 and 193/Viz/2018 and I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2015, 430/Viz/2016, 529/Viz/2017 & 248/Viz/2018

TRANSTROY (INDIA) LIMITED,GUNTUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CIRCLE 2(1) , GUNTUR

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.162 & 163/Viz/2015, 470/Viz/2016, 509/Viz/2017 & 193/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2009-10, 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Transstroy (India) Ltd. Income Tax Guntur Circle-2(1) Guntur [Pan : Aabct4226B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.193/Viz/2015, 430/Viz/2016, 529/Viz/2017 & 248/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively) M/S Transstroy (India) Ltd. Asst.Commissioner Of Guntur Income Tax Circle-2(1) [Pan : Aabct4226B] Guntur (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri T.Chaitanya Kumar, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 07.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2019

condone the delay. 3. After hearing the both the parties we are of the view that the reasons given by the AO for delay in filing the appeal are neither convincing nor satisfactory. The AO has to explain the reasons for delay on day to day 3 I.T.A. No.162 & 163/Viz/2015, 470/Viz/2016, 509/Viz/2017 and 193/Viz/2018 and I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2015, 430/Viz/2016, 529/Viz/2017 & 248/Viz/2018

TRANSTROY INDIA LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. THE ACIT,, GUNTUR

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.162 & 163/Viz/2015, 470/Viz/2016, 509/Viz/2017 & 193/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2009-10, 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Transstroy (India) Ltd. Income Tax Guntur Circle-2(1) Guntur [Pan : Aabct4226B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.193/Viz/2015, 430/Viz/2016, 529/Viz/2017 & 248/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively) M/S Transstroy (India) Ltd. Asst.Commissioner Of Guntur Income Tax Circle-2(1) [Pan : Aabct4226B] Guntur (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri T.Chaitanya Kumar, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 07.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2019

condone the delay. 3. After hearing the both the parties we are of the view that the reasons given by the AO for delay in filing the appeal are neither convincing nor satisfactory. The AO has to explain the reasons for delay on day to day 3 I.T.A. No.162 & 163/Viz/2015, 470/Viz/2016, 509/Viz/2017 and 193/Viz/2018 and I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2015, 430/Viz/2016, 529/Viz/2017 & 248/Viz/2018