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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowance of Rs.2,98,026/- under section\n40(a)(ia).Ground\n3. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre is not\njustified in confirming the treatment of Rs.34,14,944/- as unexplained\nexpenditure under section 69C.Ground\n4. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre is not\njustified in confirming the treatment of Rs.45,30,000/- as unexplained cash

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

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

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

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

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTION), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SRI KESHAVA 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)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in deciding that best judgment assessment is not valid when as per 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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(EXEMPTIONS), VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI VENKATESWARA 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)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in deciding that best judgment assessment is not valid when as per 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

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS),, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI MAHANANDEESWARA 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)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in deciding that best judgment assessment is not valid when as per 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

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTION), VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI SURY 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)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in deciding that best judgment assessment is not valid when as per 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

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTION), VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI KESHAVA 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)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in deciding that best judgment assessment is not valid when as per 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

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTION), VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI VENKATESWARA 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)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in deciding that best judgment assessment is not valid when as per 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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(EXEMPTIONS), VIJAYAWADA vs. KESAVA REDDY EDUCATIONAL TRUST,, 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)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in deciding that best judgment assessment is not valid when as per 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

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS),, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI KESAVA REDDY EDUCATIONAL TRUST,, 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)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in deciding that best judgment assessment is not valid when as per 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

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)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in deciding that best judgment assessment is not valid when as per 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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(EXEMPTIONS), VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI SARASWATHI 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)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in deciding that best judgment assessment is not valid when as per 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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(EXEMPTIONS), VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI KESHAVA 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)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in deciding that best judgment assessment is not valid when as per 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

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTION), VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI KESAVA 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)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in deciding that best judgment assessment is not valid when as per 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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(EXEMPTIONS), VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI SATYANARAYANA SWAMY 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)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred in deciding that best judgment assessment is not valid when as per 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