ISRINFRA PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

144 r.w.s. 144B is null\nand void as notice under section 143(2) has not been issued. Ground\n2. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre is not\njustified in confirming disallowance

GOWRIPATNAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,GOWRIPATNAM vs. ITO, WARD-1, TADEPALLIGUDEM

disallowed because the return was filed under Section 139(4) and not within the due date under Section 139(1), as per Section 80AC.", "result": "Allowed/Dismissed/Partly Allowed/Remanded", "sections": [ "147", "144

DASARI SAI ANNAPURNA L/R OF LATE DASARI GOPI KRISHNA REDDY,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.583/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2015-16) Dasari Sai Annapurna Vs. Assistant Commissioner L/R Of Late Dasari Gopi Of Income Tax, Krishna Reddy, Central Circle-2(1), Vijayawada. Vijayawada. Pan: Aeipd0990C (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Mv Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 27/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 08/07/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”), Dated 28/03/2022, For The Assessment Year 2015-16. The 2 Dasai Sai Annapurna L/R Of Late Dasari Gopi Krishna Reddy Vs. Acit

Section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”), dated 28/03/2022, for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The 2 Dasai Sai Annapurna L/R of Late Dasari Gopi Krishna Reddy vs. ACIT assessee has assailed the impugned order of the CIT(Appeals) on the following grounds of appeal before us: “1. The order passed

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ALFA ELECTRONIC SERVICES(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPTNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos. 50, 51 & 53/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Acit – Circle – 1(1) V. M/S. Alfa Electronic Services (India) Prathyakshakar Bhavan, Sector – 8 Private Limited Mvp Double Road, 49-22-5, Sri Sai Mansions Visakhapatnam – 530017 Lalitha Nagar, Visakhapatnam – 530016 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aahca3583E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

144 of the Act based on the material available on record. 35. Assessing Officer noticed that a survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 15.12.2015 and during the course of survey the Managing Director of the assessee-company was asked to prove the genuineness of three sub-contractors whom

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ALFA ELECTRONIC SERVICES(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPTNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos. 50, 51 & 53/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Acit – Circle – 1(1) V. M/S. Alfa Electronic Services (India) Prathyakshakar Bhavan, Sector – 8 Private Limited Mvp Double Road, 49-22-5, Sri Sai Mansions Visakhapatnam – 530017 Lalitha Nagar, Visakhapatnam – 530016 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aahca3583E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

144 of the Act based on the material available on record. 35. Assessing Officer noticed that a survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 15.12.2015 and during the course of survey the Managing Director of the assessee-company was asked to prove the genuineness of three sub-contractors whom

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ALFA ELECTRONIC SERVICES(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos. 50, 51 & 53/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Acit – Circle – 1(1) V. M/S. Alfa Electronic Services (India) Prathyakshakar Bhavan, Sector – 8 Private Limited Mvp Double Road, 49-22-5, Sri Sai Mansions Visakhapatnam – 530017 Lalitha Nagar, Visakhapatnam – 530016 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aahca3583E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

144 of the Act based on the material available on record. 35. Assessing Officer noticed that a survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 15.12.2015 and during the course of survey the Managing Director of the assessee-company was asked to prove the genuineness of three sub-contractors whom

SREE SHANTINATH MUNISUVARAT SWAMY RAJENDRA SURI JAIN TRUST,TANUKU vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD, TANUKU

section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO disallowed a deduction claimed under section 80P(2)(a)(i) and added

OMMI SANDEEP,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIZIANAGARAM

144 of the Act.\n6.\nThe case relates to the A.Y. 2017-18 and from the assessment order it is\nobserved that there is no proper compliance with regard to the submission of the\ndetails as called for by the Ld. AO. In view of the same, the deduction claimed\nby the appellant-society under section

PANDALAPAKA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OP SOCIETY LTD,EAST GODAVARI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KAKINADA

144 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act') dated 30.01.2024.\n\n4. Brief facts of the case are that, assessee has failed to furnish return of\nincome for the A.Y. 2018-19. According to the information, Ld. Assessing\nOfficer [hereinafter in short “Ld. AO\"] noticed that the assessee received a\ncommission of Rs. 58,07,237/- during the impugned

GOWRIPATNAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,GOWRIPATNAM vs. ITO, WARD-1, TADEPALLIGUDEM

disallowance was primarily based on the ground that the return of income was filed belatedly in response to a notice under Section 148, and not within the due date prescribed under Section 139(1).", "held": "The Tribunal held that for Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2016-17, the assessee is entitled to claim deduction under Section

NO H 1043 BHUJABALAPATNAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURE COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,KRISHNA DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GUDIWADA

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

Bench: The Tribunal. The Petitioner/Appellant Society Has Filed An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For The Delay In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal, Wherein It Was Submitted That The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Was Sent To The Email Of Its Then Ar, Ca B.V. Rao, Instead Of Its Email "Krishnapacs085@Gmail.Com," As Had Been Requested By It. The Appellant Society Came To Know Of The Order Only When Itd Officials Called Upon It To Pay The Tax Arrears. It Further Submitted That, Due To The Above Circumstances Beyond Its Control & Prayed That The Delay Of 69 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal May Please Be Condoned In The Interest Of Justice & That The Appeal Be Decided On Merits.

disallowance of deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i), even though the assessee has claimed the said deduction in the return of income filed on 15-12-2019, although belatedly, before the A.O. had completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act. The learned counsel for the assessee further submitted that this issue is squarely covered

GOWRIPATNAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,GOWRIPATNAM vs. ITO, WARD-1, TADEPALLIGUDEM

disallowed this deduction, citing the belated filing of the return.", "held": "The Tribunal held that for A.Y. 2015-16, the deduction under section 80P cannot be denied solely on the ground that the return was filed belatedly in response to a notice under section 148, as long as the claim was made in the filed return. The amendment to section

POTHINA SATYANARAYANA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.568/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Pothina Satyanarayana, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-2(5), Pan: Ahdpp1312N Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 19/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 26/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm : The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 10/07/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”), Dated 12/02/2024 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. The 2 Pothina Satyanarayana Vs. Ito

Section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”), dated 12/02/2024 for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The 2 Pothina Satyanarayana vs. ITO assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us: 1. “The order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is contrary to the facts and also

SRI TIRUMALA ESTATES AND FARMLANDS,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Section 147 of the Act, and determined the total income at Rs.90,88,140/- by making addition towards difference in sale consideration of Rs.13,98,800/-, additions towards 20% of disallowance

SRI TIRUMALA ESTATES AND FARMLANDS,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Section 147 of the Act, and determined the total income at Rs.90,88,140/- by making addition towards difference in sale consideration of Rs.13,98,800/-, additions towards 20% of disallowance

PANDALAPAKA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,EAST GODAVARI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER-WARD-1, KAKINADA

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.437 & 438/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21) Pandalapaka Primary Agricultural V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 1 Income Tax Office Co-Op Credit Society Ltd., 3Rd Floor, Deepthi Towers 5-28/1, Pandalapaka Main Road, Kakinada – 533001 Biccavole Mandal – 533345 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aabap2382G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

144 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) dated 30.01.2024. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, assessee has failed to furnish return of income for the A.Y. 2018-19. According to the information, Ld. Assessing Officer [hereinafter in short “Ld. AO"] noticed that the assessee received a commission of Rs. 58,07,237/- during the impugned assessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(EXEMPTIONS), VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI MAHANANDEESWARA EDUCATIONAL SOCEITY, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.87 & 288/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

section 144 the only condition to invoke 144 assessee’s failure to comply with all the terms of a notice issued U/s. 142(1) and the assessee has not complied notice U/s. 142(1) and hence assessment U/s. 144 is valid. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in considering the submission of the assessee, that the society is not able

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(EXEMPTIONS), VIJAYAWADA vs. BHARAT REDDY EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, , HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.87 & 288/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

section 144 the only condition to invoke 144 assessee’s failure to comply with all the terms of a notice issued U/s. 142(1) and the assessee has not complied notice U/s. 142(1) and hence assessment U/s. 144 is valid. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in considering the submission of the assessee, that the society is not able

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(EXEMPTIONS), VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI SURYA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, , HYDEERABAD

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.87 & 288/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

section 144 the only condition to invoke 144 assessee’s failure to comply with all the terms of a notice issued U/s. 142(1) and the assessee has not complied notice U/s. 142(1) and hence assessment U/s. 144 is valid. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in considering the submission of the assessee, that the society is not able