BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

117 results for “disallowance”+ Unexplained Moneyclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,037Delhi1,716Chennai715Kolkata642Jaipur448Ahmedabad401Bangalore398Hyderabad358Pune239Indore214Chandigarh210Surat160Rajkot141Visakhapatnam117Cochin111Nagpur108Raipur83Cuttack73Amritsar61Guwahati59Lucknow59Agra47Allahabad44Jodhpur39Calcutta38Panaji33Patna26Dehradun16Varanasi10Ranchi10Jabalpur9Karnataka7Telangana5SC3Orissa2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Addition to Income89Section 14887Section 143(3)84Section 153A70Section 143(2)62Section 13241Section 142(1)37Disallowance35Section 6834

SURESH KUMAR JAIN,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , VISAKHAPATNAM

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 585/VIZ/2019[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam11 Dec 2019AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhs.A.No.69/Viz/2019 To 71/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. Nos. 585-587/Viz/2019 Respectively) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 To 2016-17 Respectively) Sri Suresh Kumar Jain Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.50-50-38/9 Income Tax Tpt Colony Central Circle-1 Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Adzpj5028K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 585/Viz/2019 To 587/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 To 2016-17 Respectively) Sri Suresh Kumar Jain Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.50-50-38/9 Income Tax Tpt Colony Central Circle-1 Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Adzpj5028K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri T.S.N.Murthy, Cit, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.12.2019

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.S.N.Murthy, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Showing 1–20 of 117 · Page 1 of 6

Section 69A32
Unexplained Investment25
Search & Seizure25
Section 69A
Section 80I

Unexplained money - Rs.1,28,90,658 Disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act - Rs.5,13,096 4. Aggrieved by the order

SURESH KUMAR JAIN,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 587/VIZ/2019[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam11 Dec 2019AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhs.A.No.69/Viz/2019 To 71/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. Nos. 585-587/Viz/2019 Respectively) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 To 2016-17 Respectively) Sri Suresh Kumar Jain Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.50-50-38/9 Income Tax Tpt Colony Central Circle-1 Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Adzpj5028K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 585/Viz/2019 To 587/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 To 2016-17 Respectively) Sri Suresh Kumar Jain Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.50-50-38/9 Income Tax Tpt Colony Central Circle-1 Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Adzpj5028K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri T.S.N.Murthy, Cit, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.12.2019

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.S.N.Murthy, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69ASection 80I

Unexplained money - Rs.1,28,90,658 Disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act - Rs.5,13,096 4. Aggrieved by the order

SURESH KUMAR JAIN,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 586/VIZ/2019[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam11 Dec 2019AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhs.A.No.69/Viz/2019 To 71/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. Nos. 585-587/Viz/2019 Respectively) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 To 2016-17 Respectively) Sri Suresh Kumar Jain Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.50-50-38/9 Income Tax Tpt Colony Central Circle-1 Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Adzpj5028K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 585/Viz/2019 To 587/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 To 2016-17 Respectively) Sri Suresh Kumar Jain Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.50-50-38/9 Income Tax Tpt Colony Central Circle-1 Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Adzpj5028K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri T.S.N.Murthy, Cit, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.12.2019

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.S.N.Murthy, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69ASection 80I

Unexplained money - Rs.1,28,90,658 Disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act - Rs.5,13,096 4. Aggrieved by the order

JANGA RAJASEKHARA REDDY,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 208/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.208/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2018-19) Janga Rajasekhara Reddy Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Dr.No.54-18/1-1A Income Tax Flat No.504, Lakshmi Residency Central Circle Prasanthi Nagar, Iti College Road Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan : Agmpj7948L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Madhukar Aves, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 06.09.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18 .10.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) [Cit(A)]-12, Hyderabad Vide Appeal No.10806/2019-20 Dated 30.06.2023 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “Act”) Dated 26.12.2019 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.)2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, Ceo Of M/S Yugandhar Housing Private Limited, Had Filed His Return Of Income On 30.08.2018 By Admitting Total Income Of Rs.11,26,240/-. A Search & Seizure Operation

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madhukar Aves, DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

disallowance of Rs.1,00,000/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the I.T.Act even though the source is explained and 4 I.T.A

NAKKA KASIVISWESWARA RAO,EAST GODAVARI DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), RAJAHMUNDRY

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

ITA 278/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 278/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2016-17) Nakka Kasivisweswara Rao V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(3) Income Tax Office #7-155 Aayakar Bhavan Kadiyapulanka Village Veerabhadrapuram Kadiyam Mandal Kambala Cheruvu East Godavari District-533126 Rajahmundry-533105 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aenpn2596K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

disallowed the balance amount of Rs.10,26,289/- and added to the total income of the assessee as unexplained money

ALLADI KRISHNA PRASAD,MANDALAPARRU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , TADEPALLIGUDEM

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

ITA 172/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.172/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Alladi Krishna Prasad V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 1 Aayakar Bhawan D.No. 3-73, Mandalaparru D.No. 2-1-56/1 Nidamarru Mandal Opp. Punjab National Bank West Godavari – 534198 K.N. Road, Tadepalligudem – 534101 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Bcjpa7058L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144

unexplained money u/s.69A of the I.T.Act. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) is not justified in dismissing the appeal on the pretext that no evidences were furnished in support of grounds of appeal while submitting the written⁠submissions even though the same were duly submitted to the CIT(A), Rajahmundry manually before faceless scheme

THE ACIT,, GUNTUR vs. SAI BHASKAR IRONS LIMITED,, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 108/VIZ/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.108/Viz/2016 (ननधधारण वषा/Assessment Year:2012-13) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S.Sai Bhaskar Circle-2(1), Guntur Irons Limited 3-1-3/A, 3Rd Lane Rajendra Nagar Guntur [Pan :Aamcs1675G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Deba K.Sonowala, Dr प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri I Kama Sastry, Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 09.02.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2018

For Appellant: Shri Deba K.Sonowala, DRFor Respondent: Shri I Kama Sastry, AR
Section 14Section 68

money in the company and the assessee has not produced the details to the satisfaction of the AO. As a result, the AO disallowed the same and added to the total income as per the provision of 68 to the extent of Rs.3,99,00,000/- and with regard to the set off of unabsorbed carry forwarded depreciation loss

VAKA GHANTA NAGESWARARAO,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, TENALI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 251/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.251/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward – 1 Vaka Ghanta Nageswararao 4-82-A, Gullapalli Tenali -522201 Goudapalem, Cherukapalli Mandal Andhra Pradesh Guntur – 522309 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Afjpn4315H] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Malladi Muralidhar, Ca करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 250(6)Section 69ASection 80C

unexplained money and has also disallowed an amount of Rs.1,85,500/- being claim made by the assessee towards interest

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SRI RAM MANCHUKONDA,, VIZIANAGARAM

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

ITA 37/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Sept 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.37/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. Sri Sriram Manchukonda Circle-3(1) #7-6-8/1, Mg Road Visakhapatnam Vizianagaram [Pan : Ahipm8862F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.34/Viz/2021 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.37/Viz/2021) (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Satyanarayana Raju, DR
Section 271ASection 69A

unexplained money when the AO found money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article and the assessee offers no explanation to the satisfaction of the AO. In the instant case, the source of cash deposited by the assessee in the bank account was duly explained by the assessee and the same was duly accounted in the books of accounts. Thus, there

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. JAYA PRAKASH BABU VALLURI, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result appeal of the revenue and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 31/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Sept 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.31/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. Sri Jaya Prakash Babu Valluri Circle-3(1) #1/211, Vasanth Vihar Visakhapatnam Opp. Railway Station Vizianagaram [Pan : Acnpv2451K]

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.Srinivasa Rao, DR
Section 40

disallowed and added back to the income. 5 ITA No.31/Viz/2021 and CO No.52 /Viz/2021, A.Y.2017-18 Jaya Prakash Babu Valluri, Vizianagaram 9. Against which the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) found that the assessee advanced the amounts to VVCIPL on which interest paid to the extent of Rs.31,06,036/-. The assessee also received

THE MACHILIPATNAM POSTAL DEPTL & GDS CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED NO H164,MACHILIPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MACHILIPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 249/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.249/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) The Machilipatnam Postal Deptl & Gds V. Income Tax Officer – Ward -1 Co-Op Credit Society Limited No. H164 Aayakar Bhavan, Parasupeta Machilipatnam – 521001 Machilipatnam – 521001 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aafat5514L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69ASection 80ASection 80P

unexplained money under section 69A of the Act and added it to the total income of the assessee. 3. Further, Ld. AO also did not accept the explanation provided by the assessee with respect to deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80P of the Act amounting to Rs. 17,92,203/-. Ld. AO thus invoked the provisions of section

KUNADHARAJU NAGA VENKATA RAMAKRISHNA RAJU,GANAPAVARAM MANDAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TANUKU

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

ITA 442/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.442/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2018-19) Kanadharaju Naga Venkata Ramakrishnam Raju V. Income Tax Officer – Ward-1 D.No. 3-96, Jallikakinada Income Tax Office, Sajjapuram Ganapavaram Mandal Tanuku – 534211 Andhra Pradesh West Godavari District – 534186 Andhra Pradesh

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

unexplained money. 4. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.” 6. At the time of hearing, Ld. AR submitted that Ld.CIT(A) passed exparte order without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, therefore, considering additions/disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, Ld.AR pleaded Page. No 3 I.T.A.No.442/VIZ/2024 Kanadharaju Naga Venkata Ramakrishnam

PURAMA RAMAKRISHNA RAO,SALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 221/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.221/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Purama Ramakrishna Rao, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Saluru, Vizianagaram Dist., Ward-2, Andhra Pradesh. Vizianagaram. Pan: Altpp40003E (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 : 10/09/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 25/09/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 119(2)(b)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 271FSection 3Section 69A

disallowance of cash deposits only during the November & December 2016 of Rs.10,74,400/- and Rs. 14,14,600/- respectively. It is also an admitted fact that the assessee has filed his return of income after issuance of notice U/s. 142(1) of the Act. However, the Ld. AO made an addition of Rs. 21,30,000/- as 6 unexplained

SRI VASAVI KALA MANDIR,BOBBILI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 107/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.107/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Sri Vasavi Kala Mandir, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, D.No. 2/16, Main Road, Ward-1, Bobbili, Vizianagaram Dist, Vizianagaram District, Andhra Pradesh – 535558. Andhra Pradesh-535002. Pan: Aaifs2687P (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 : 30/07/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 27/08/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 69A

money U/s. 69A r.w.s 115BBE of the Act…..”. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, the assessee is in 4 appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable to the facts of the case

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. TATIPARTI SATYANARAYANA, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 76/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.76/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Income Tax Officer Vs. Sri Tatiparti Satyanarayana Ward-1(1) D.No.25-8-9 & 10 Visakhapatnam Sri Satyanarayana Gold Complex, Main Road Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aggpt5353F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Co No.42/Viz/2014 (Arising Out Of Ita No.76/Viz/2021) (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Sri Tatiparti Satyanarayana Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.25-8-9 & 10 Ward-1(1) Sri Satyanarayana Gold Complex, Visakhapatnam Main Road, Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aggpt5353F] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri S.P.G.Mudaliar, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 22.02.2022 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16 .03.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Balakrishnan Sthis Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], Visakhapatnam In Ita

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.P.G.Mudaliar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 69Section 69A

unexplained money as per the provisions of section 69A of the Income Tax Act. 5. The CIT (A) erred in allowing additional evidence filed by the assessee in the form of documents / paper book, when the same were not produced before the Assessing Officer, without providing opportunity to the Assessing Officer to examine and, if necessary, rebut the additional evidence

THE SOCIETY OF JESUS MARY JOSEPH SNEHALAYA,MANGALAGIRI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,WARD-2(1), GUNTUR

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

ITA 369/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

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

Section 12ASection 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 48Section 69Section 69A

money u/s 69A, addition of Rs. 2,48,818/- as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 and addition of Rs. 30,470/- as income from other sources. Further, Assessing Officer levied a tax of Rs. 1,31,54,351/-. 4. On being aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) but the assessee even after

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SRI MUTCHUAKARLA APPA RAO, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 668/VIZ/2019[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Mar 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.668/Viz/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Mutchuakarla Appa Rao, Ward-3(2), Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Ahvpm 9813 F (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) C.O. No.22/Viz/2021 (In आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.668/Viz/2019) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Sri Mutchuakarla Appa Rao, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-3(2), Pan: Ahvpm 9813 F Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca ""याथ" क" ओर से / Revenue By : Sri On Hari Prasad Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 17/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasad Rao
Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250A

money from Hyderabad to Visakhapatnam. The Ld. AR further submitted that various judicial decisions have rendered and laid down the ratio that the statement recorded U/s. 131(1) of the Act is not binding on the assessee and hence the additions cannot be made based on the statement recorded from the assessee

GHANTA PUNNA RAO,GUNTUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), , GUNTUR

In the result, the appeal and cross objection filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 179/VIZ/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Nov 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.179/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-2012) Ghanta Punna Rao Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Varandas Apartments Income Tax 1/3, Navabharat Nagar Circle-2(1) Guntur Guntur [Pan : Adupg3613J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.354/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-2012) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. Ghanta Punna Rao Income Tax 3Rd Floor, Varandas Apartments Circle-2(1) 1/3, Navabharat Nagar Guntur Guntur [Pan : Adupg3613J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.124/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.354/Viz/2019) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-2012) Ghanta Punna Rao Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Varandas Apartments Income Tax 1/3, Navabharat Nagar Circle-2(1) Guntur Guntur [Pan : Adupg3613J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

disallowed by the AO. However, having regard to evidences, the appellant certainly received Rs. 1,14,08,200/- during the year and hence the balance amount i.e. Rs. 74,91,800/- (Rs.1,89,00,000 - 1,14,08,200) can only be treated as unexplained one. The appellant explained that during the year received Rs 52,50,000/- on account

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ATR WAREHOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 102/VIZ/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

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

For Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

unexplained cash credit U/s. 68 of the Act and added the same to the total income of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AO further noted from the books of account that the assessee claimed Rs. 56,34,856/- as finance charges payable to M/s. Shriram Transport Finance Co., Ltd and no tax U/s. 194A was deducted thereon. Since the assessee

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ANUMOLU TIRUPATI RAYUDU(HUF),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 100/VIZ/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

unexplained cash credit U/s. 68 of the Act and added the same to the total income of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AO further noted from the books of account that the assessee claimed Rs. 56,34,856/- as finance charges payable to M/s. Shriram Transport Finance Co., Ltd and no tax U/s. 194A was deducted thereon. Since the assessee