DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

house property' but not as\nbusiness income.\nGround 3.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the ground of appeal\non the addition of Rs. 17,37,69,180/- made towards interest disallowed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1), , GUNTUR vs. BBM ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED, GUNTUR

In the result, Revenue appeal is allowed and the C

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri S. Balakrishnan.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.185/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Vs. Bbm Estates (P) Ltd Circle 1(1) Guntur Guntur Pan: Aaace2607G (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O No.12/Viz/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1895/Viz/2024) Bbm Estates (P) Ltd Vs. Acit Guntur Circle 1(1) Pan: Aaace2607G Guntur (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri G.V.N. Hari, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Satyasai Rath, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 01/04/2025 आदेश/Order

House Property”. 2. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT (A) ought to have held that the Assessing Officer is not justified in disallowing

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA vs. SIVA JYOTHI PALAM, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.268/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Siva Jyothi Palam, Income Tax, Vijayawada. Circle-1(1), Pan: Bksps2554L Vijayawada. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) C.O. No. 04/Viz/2024 (In आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.268/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Siva Jyothi Palam, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Vijayawada. Income Tax, Pan: Bksps2554L Circle-1(1), Vijayawada. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/10/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 09/10/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

house property at Chennai for a consideration of Rs. 6,06,10,000/- and claimed deduction U/s. 54F of the Act. After considering the submissions of the assessee as well as the material available on record, the Ld. AO completed the assessment U/s. 143(3) of the Act and disallowed

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)

house property in USA cannot be taxed in India as it is taxed in USA. The AO further observed that even as per Article 13 of the Indo-USA DTAA, capital gains are to be taxed in the contracting state in which they arise and as per the law of that contracting state as follows : Article 13- Gains – Except

ACN INFOTECH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATANAM vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), VISAKHAPATANAM

In the result, the 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.94/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Acn Infotech India Private Limited Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of 3A, Balajis Mangalagiri Chambers Income Tax Siripuram Circle-1(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aafca7810A]

House Property', in the interests of justice. 8) The Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax ought to have set aside the impugned assessment nor doing denovo assessment to consider. and examine the veracity of the claims and contentions of the appellant company raised in this regard, as against his impugned order directing the assessing officer to disallow

AS RAJA SONS ENTERPRISES PVT LTD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.379/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) A.S. Raja Sons Enterprises (P.) Ltd., V. Asst. Cit – Circle – 1(1) Income Tax Office D.No. 10-5-11/5 Pratyakshakar Bhavan Care Hospital, Waltair Main Road Mvp Double Road Visakhapatnam – 530002 Visakhapatnam - 530017 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aabca4796M] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

House Property' towards: a) re-computation of annual value us 23(1)(a) at Rs.6,04,80,000 as against Rs.1,23,46,200 computed by the appellant. b) disallowance

OAKWOOD THE RAJAHMUNDRY SCHOOL,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated herein above

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 103/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Oakwood The Rajahmundry Vs. Income Tax Officer, School, Ward-4(2), Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aabfo 9339 F (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri P V Madhusudana Rao ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

disallowance of rent U/s. 68 of Rs. 2,68,200/- and unexplained cash credit U/s. 68 of Rs. 83,863/-.  The appellant submits that rent amount of Rs. 14,66,820/- has been claimed as expenditure out of which Rs. 13,82,957/- has been paid to Mr. Akula Satyanarayana and the balance rent of Rs. 83,863/- was paid

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. BABU RAJENDRA PRASAD VADLAMUDI, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.154/Viz/2019 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2011-12) The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Babu Rajendra Prasad Income Tax (International Vadlamudi, Taxation), Visakhapatnam. Guntur. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri A. Chaitanya, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 30/03/2023 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of : 23/05/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

properties during the assessment year 2011-12 and claimed exemption U/s. 54F of the Act. Since the assessee has not filed any income tax returns for the AY 2011-12, notice U/s. 148 was issued on 19/03/2015 and served on 17/4/2015 to Sri Tummala Kishore Kumar, GPA holder of the assessee. Since there was no response from the assessee, notice

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)

disallow the deduction claimed u/s 54F. Thereafter, the AO issued notice and he has examined the properties and came to conclusion that the property at Arundelpet, Guntur is not residential property and passed order. The AO complied with the directions issued by the Ld.Pr.CIT u/s 263. The Ld.AR further submitted that the Ld.Pr.CIT has again issued notice to the assessee

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)

disallow the deduction claimed u/s 54F. Thereafter, the AO issued notice and he has examined the properties and came to conclusion that the property at Arundelpet, Guntur is not residential property and passed order. The AO complied with the directions issued by the Ld.Pr.CIT u/s 263. The Ld.AR further submitted that the Ld.Pr.CIT has again issued notice to the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3) , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. MEENA TANGUDU, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

disallowed the claim of the\nassessee and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs. 2,27,27,940/-.\n3. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, assessee filed an appeal before\nLd.CIT(A). Before Ld. CIT(A), assessee submitted that portion of the land was\nsold to M/s. Spectrum Properties in pursuance of a Joint Development\nAgreement

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DATLA SHANTI, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

house property as commercial property whereas as per the GVMC records it is a residential property”. In response to the show cause notice the assessee submitted that it is not a residential property and used only for commercial purposes. Considering the replies of the assessee, the Ld. AO disallowed

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONALTAXATION, , VIJAYAWADA vs. KRISHNA MOHAN MALEMPATI, WELLINGTON MANOR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

house property. The contention of the Ld. AO could not be accepted as it is prerogative of the assessee to withdraw cash as per his requirements and the Department cannot dictate the manner in which the assessee should withdraw the cash. Further, we find that the Ld. AO has not questioned the source of deposits into the bank account

ATR WAREHOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

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

property, other sources and agricultural income from warehousing filed its return of income for the AY 2014-15 on 30/11/2014 declaring total income of Rs. NIL (Loss of Rs. 2,83,99,853/-). The main source of business income is license fee collected from the tenants for the ware housing godowns at various places viz., Visakhapatnam, Kakinada and Hyderabad

ATR WAREHOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED .,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

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

property, other sources and agricultural income from warehousing filed its return of income for the AY 2014-15 on 30/11/2014 declaring total income of Rs. NIL (Loss of Rs. 2,83,99,853/-). The main source of business income is license fee collected from the tenants for the ware housing godowns at various places viz., Visakhapatnam, Kakinada and Hyderabad

ATR WAREHOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

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

property, other sources and agricultural income from warehousing filed its return of income for the AY 2014-15 on 30/11/2014 declaring total income of Rs. NIL (Loss of Rs. 2,83,99,853/-). The main source of business income is license fee collected from the tenants for the ware housing godowns at various places viz., Visakhapatnam, Kakinada and Hyderabad

GUNISETTY SUDHARANI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.187/Viz/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2017-18 Gunisetty Sudha Rani, Vs. Income Tax Officer, D.No. 5-156, Main Road, Ward-4(2), Gopalapatnam, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam. Andhra Pradesh – 530027. Pan: Antpg7996D (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/06/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 14/08/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

House property 4,65,826 Income from business (Admitted) 7,86,381 Add Disallowance of freight expenses 3,23,512 Discrepancy

THE ELURU COOPERATIVE HOUSE MORTGAGE SOCIETY LTD.,,ELURU vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, ELURU

disallowances made by\nthe Ld. AO under section 80P of the Act by observing as follows: -\nPage No. 4\n“5.2. From the perusal of the Assessment order, it is clear that the appellant\nsociety has been collecting deposits from non-members and sanctioning\nloans to non-members and staff. The judgment of the Hon'ble A. P. High\nCourt