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.

197 results for “house property”+ Section 2(22)(e)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,807Delhi2,264Bangalore990Chennai640Karnataka640Ahmedabad459Kolkata385Jaipur382Hyderabad363Indore242Surat210Chandigarh202Visakhapatnam197Cochin179Pune176Telangana120Rajkot86Lucknow76Amritsar75Raipur75Nagpur68Cuttack66SC60Calcutta58Agra40Patna33Guwahati27Jodhpur24Rajasthan14Varanasi13Allahabad12Kerala12Dehradun7Orissa5Jabalpur4Ranchi4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Andhra Pradesh2Himachal Pradesh2Gauhati1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1Punjab & Haryana1J&K1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Addition to Income50Section 143(3)42Section 14737Section 14831Condonation of Delay28Section 143(2)26House Property19Section 153A18Section 148A

THE ITO,, GUNTUR vs. YARLAGADDA SURENDRABABU,, GUNTUR

Appeal is dismissed, the cross objection filed by the

ITA 71/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Mar 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G. Satyanandam, DRFor Respondent: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 2(22)(e)

section 2(22)(e) and brought to tax the amount borrowed by the assessee. Hence, argued that no interference is called for and the order of the CIT(A) required to be set aside. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is an individual deriving salary income and for the purpose

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, GUNTUR vs. SAKUNTHALA MADALA, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 197 · Page 1 of 10

...
16
Section 14A16
Unexplained Investment16
Survey u/s 133A16
ITA 189/VIZ/2018[2008-09]Status: Disposed
ITAT Visakhapatnam
12 Sept 2018
AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.187/Viz/2018 & 188/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively) The Acit, Circle-1(1) Sri Sudhakar Madala Guntur Janachaitanya Housing Pvt. Ltd. 1St Floor, Pasumalai Complex 5/1 Aundelpet, Guntur [Pan :Acvpm9449E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.189/Viz/2018 & 190/Viz/2018 (धििाारणिर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively) The Acit, Circle-1(1) Smt.Sakunthala Madala Guntur Janachaitanya Housing Pvt. Ltd. 1St Floor, Pasumalai Complex 5/1 Aundelpet, Guntur [Pan :Acvpm9450F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Ch.Sanjeev, Dr प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri M Madhusudan, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2018 12 .09.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri Ch.Sanjeev, DRFor Respondent: Shri M Madhusudan, AR
Section 2(22)(e)

2. Sri Madala Sudhakar and Smt. Madala Sakunthala are the Directors and the shareholders of M/s Janachaitanya Housing Pvt. Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as JHPL) and M/s Srusti Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as SIPL). Sri Madala Sudhakar is the Managing Director of JHPL and Shakuntala is the Director. Both of them are having substantial and n controlling share

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, GUNTUR vs. SUDHAKAR MADALA, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 188/VIZ/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.187/Viz/2018 & 188/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively) The Acit, Circle-1(1) Sri Sudhakar Madala Guntur Janachaitanya Housing Pvt. Ltd. 1St Floor, Pasumalai Complex 5/1 Aundelpet, Guntur [Pan :Acvpm9449E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.189/Viz/2018 & 190/Viz/2018 (धििाारणिर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively) The Acit, Circle-1(1) Smt.Sakunthala Madala Guntur Janachaitanya Housing Pvt. Ltd. 1St Floor, Pasumalai Complex 5/1 Aundelpet, Guntur [Pan :Acvpm9450F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Ch.Sanjeev, Dr प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri M Madhusudan, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2018 12 .09.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri Ch.Sanjeev, DRFor Respondent: Shri M Madhusudan, AR
Section 2(22)(e)

2. Sri Madala Sudhakar and Smt. Madala Sakunthala are the Directors and the shareholders of M/s Janachaitanya Housing Pvt. Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as JHPL) and M/s Srusti Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as SIPL). Sri Madala Sudhakar is the Managing Director of JHPL and Shakuntala is the Director. Both of them are having substantial and n controlling share

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, GUNTUR vs. SAKUNTHALA MADALA, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 190/VIZ/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.187/Viz/2018 & 188/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively) The Acit, Circle-1(1) Sri Sudhakar Madala Guntur Janachaitanya Housing Pvt. Ltd. 1St Floor, Pasumalai Complex 5/1 Aundelpet, Guntur [Pan :Acvpm9449E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.189/Viz/2018 & 190/Viz/2018 (धििाारणिर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively) The Acit, Circle-1(1) Smt.Sakunthala Madala Guntur Janachaitanya Housing Pvt. Ltd. 1St Floor, Pasumalai Complex 5/1 Aundelpet, Guntur [Pan :Acvpm9450F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Ch.Sanjeev, Dr प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri M Madhusudan, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2018 12 .09.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri Ch.Sanjeev, DRFor Respondent: Shri M Madhusudan, AR
Section 2(22)(e)

2. Sri Madala Sudhakar and Smt. Madala Sakunthala are the Directors and the shareholders of M/s Janachaitanya Housing Pvt. Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as JHPL) and M/s Srusti Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as SIPL). Sri Madala Sudhakar is the Managing Director of JHPL and Shakuntala is the Director. Both of them are having substantial and n controlling share

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, GUTNUR vs. SUDHAKAR MADALA, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 187/VIZ/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.187/Viz/2018 & 188/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively) The Acit, Circle-1(1) Sri Sudhakar Madala Guntur Janachaitanya Housing Pvt. Ltd. 1St Floor, Pasumalai Complex 5/1 Aundelpet, Guntur [Pan :Acvpm9449E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.189/Viz/2018 & 190/Viz/2018 (धििाारणिर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively) The Acit, Circle-1(1) Smt.Sakunthala Madala Guntur Janachaitanya Housing Pvt. Ltd. 1St Floor, Pasumalai Complex 5/1 Aundelpet, Guntur [Pan :Acvpm9450F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Ch.Sanjeev, Dr प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri M Madhusudan, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2018 12 .09.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri Ch.Sanjeev, DRFor Respondent: Shri M Madhusudan, AR
Section 2(22)(e)

2. Sri Madala Sudhakar and Smt. Madala Sakunthala are the Directors and the shareholders of M/s Janachaitanya Housing Pvt. Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as JHPL) and M/s Srusti Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as SIPL). Sri Madala Sudhakar is the Managing Director of JHPL and Shakuntala is the Director. Both of them are having substantial and n controlling share

SRI UMA KAMANDALESWARA CO - OPERATIVE RURAL BANK LTD.,ATHREYAPURAM vs. THE ADDL. CIT,, KAKINADA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 199/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Feb 2019AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Blesri Uma Kamandaleswara Vs. Addl.Cit, Kakinada Co-Op Rural Bank Ltd., Ryali, Range, Kakinada. Athreyapuram Mandalm, East Godavari District. Pan No. Aadas 4663 B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.S. Murthy – Sr.DR
Section 80P(2)(a)

e) Any income derived by the co-operative society from the letting of godowns or warehouses for storage, processing or facilitating the marketing of commodities ; (f) A co-operative society other than (1) A The income by way of interest on securities and housing society ; (2) An urban consumer society the income from house property chargeable ; (3) A society carrying

THE SRI GOWRI COOPERATIVE SOCIETY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 26/VIZ/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blem/S. The Sri Gowri Vs. Pr.Cit-1, Co-Operative Society, Visakhapatnam. D.No.49-34-32/1, Konathala Complex, Akkayyapalem Main Road, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaaat 8140 M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.S.S. Sarma – AdvFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Sonawal– CIT DR
Section 263Section 80P(2)(a)

e) Any income derived by the co-operative The whole of such income. society from the letting of godowns or warehouses for storage, processing or facilitating the marketing of commodities ; (f) A co-operative society other than (1) A The income by way of interest on securities and housing society ; (2) An urban consumer society the income from house property

LATE AT RAYUDU INDIVIDUAL REPRESENTATIVE BY AVINASH ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, APPEALS-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 614/VIZ/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 68

property, other sources and agricultural income, filed its return of income on 31/12/2013 for the AY 2013-14 admitting a total income of Rs. 11,63,250/- and agricultural income of Rs. 5,14,000/-. Subsequently, search and seizure operations u/s. 132 of the Act were conducted on 14/10/2015 in the case of the assessee and its members

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee dismissed

ITA 96/VIZ/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 68

property, other sources and agricultural income, filed its return of income on 31/12/2013 for the AY 2013-14 admitting a total income of Rs. 11,63,250/- and agricultural income of Rs. 5,14,000/-. Subsequently, search and seizure operations u/s. 132 of the Act were conducted on 14/10/2015 in the case of the assessee and its members

LATE AT RAYUDU INDIVIDUAL REPRESENTATIVE BY AVINASH ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, APPEALS-3, , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 613/VIZ/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 68

property, other sources and agricultural income, filed its return of income on 31/12/2013 for the AY 2013-14 admitting a total income of Rs. 11,63,250/- and agricultural income of Rs. 5,14,000/-. Subsequently, search and seizure operations u/s. 132 of the Act were conducted on 14/10/2015 in the case of the assessee and its members

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

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue, viz

ITA 206/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.

For Appellant: 1.Shri Karnjot Singh KhuranaFor Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

E). CIT, Thiruvananthapuram Vs. Oberon Edifices & Estates (P) Ltd. (2019) 103 taxmann.com 413 (Kerala) The Hon’ble High Court had observed that, where the primary intention of the assessee company by letting out shops in a mall was commercial exploitation of property, income so derived from the same would be assessed as income from business and not as income from

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

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue, viz

ITA 314/VIZ/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.

For Appellant: 1.Shri Karnjot Singh KhuranaFor Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

E). CIT, Thiruvananthapuram Vs. Oberon Edifices & Estates (P) Ltd. (2019) 103 taxmann.com 413 (Kerala) The Hon’ble High Court had observed that, where the primary intention of the assessee company by letting out shops in a mall was commercial exploitation of property, income so derived from the same would be assessed as income from business and not as income from

GOWTHAM RESIDENTIAL JUNIOR COLLEGE,VIJAYAWADA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 26/VIZ/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.25 & 26/Viz/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2013-14) Gowtham Residential Junior College V. Asst. Cit-Central Circle Vijayawada 1-87, Gudavalli Village Gudavalli, Vijayawada – 521104 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaefg4399L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 255(4)

section 28(i).0f the Income Tax Act, 1961- Income from house property-chargeable us (Business income v. Property Income) Assessment years 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08 and 2008-09 - High Court by impugned order held that where assessee was not engaged in any business activity, rental income earned from letting out commercial complex would be assessed as income

GOWTHAM RESIDENTIAL JUNIOR COLLEGE,VIJAYAWADA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 25/VIZ/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.25 & 26/Viz/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2013-14) Gowtham Residential Junior College V. Asst. Cit-Central Circle Vijayawada 1-87, Gudavalli Village Gudavalli, Vijayawada – 521104 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaefg4399L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 255(4)

section 28(i).0f the Income Tax Act, 1961- Income from house property-chargeable us (Business income v. Property Income) Assessment years 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08 and 2008-09 - High Court by impugned order held that where assessee was not engaged in any business activity, rental income earned from letting out commercial complex would be assessed as income

VENKATA RAMANA GODA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 489/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.489/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Venkata Ramana Goda, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Pan: Abzpg3216A Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Mrs. K. Hemalatha, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 17/11/2025 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 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 06/08/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 08/03/2025. The 2 Venkata Ramana Goda Vs. Acit

For Appellant: Mrs. K. Hemalatha, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 2(14)(iii)Section 234ASection 234BSection 250

property, thus, in the absence of the requisite details, held the entire amount of the sale consideration of Rs. 61.60 lakhs (supra) as his income under the head “Short term capital gain” (STCG) and added the same to his income. 6 Venkata Ramana Goda vs. ACIT 6. Accordingly, the AO, after making the aforementioned additions, vide his order passed under

SATYANARAYANA KODURU,KRISHNA DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GUDIWADA

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

ITA 491/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.491/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Satyanarayana Koduru, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Krishna District. Ward-1, Pan:Altpk1048C Gudiwada. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 02/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm :

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69Section 69A

property of Rs.59,84,000/-; (ii) addition under section 69 of the Act in respect of the registration charges and stamp duty of Rs.4,48,700/-; (iii) addition under section 69A of the Act of unexplained cash deposits in bank account: Rs.32,30,000/-; (iv) addition of undisclosed salary received from NHAI: Rs.17,62,155/-; (v) 4 Satyanarayana Koduru

GATTULA LAKSHMI MADHAVI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 385/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.385, 386 & 387/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Pan: Agfpg8929H Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate (Hybrid) राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 15/10/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Ravish Sood, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam-3, Dated 21/03/2025, 24/03/2025 & 16/04/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Respective Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 Of The Income Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi Vs. Acit Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, "The Act”), Dated 27/03/2023; Under Section 271Aac(1) Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023; & Under Section 270A Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. As The Facts Involved In The Captioned Appeals Are Inextricably Interwoven, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69

properties (assets). Accordingly, the AO worked out the unexplained investment made by the assessee during the subject year at Rs. 21,35,549/-, as under: Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi vs. ACIT 10. Thereafter, the AO vide his order under section 147 of the Act, dated 27/03/2023, determined the income of the assessee at Rs. 36,38,936/-. Also, the AO while

GATTULA LAKSHMI MADHAVI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 387/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.385, 386 & 387/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Pan: Agfpg8929H Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate (Hybrid) राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 15/10/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Ravish Sood, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam-3, Dated 21/03/2025, 24/03/2025 & 16/04/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Respective Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 Of The Income Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi Vs. Acit Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, "The Act”), Dated 27/03/2023; Under Section 271Aac(1) Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023; & Under Section 270A Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. As The Facts Involved In The Captioned Appeals Are Inextricably Interwoven, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69

properties (assets). Accordingly, the AO worked out the unexplained investment made by the assessee during the subject year at Rs. 21,35,549/-, as under: Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi vs. ACIT 10. Thereafter, the AO vide his order under section 147 of the Act, dated 27/03/2023, determined the income of the assessee at Rs. 36,38,936/-. Also, the AO while

GATTULA LAKSHMI MADHAVI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 386/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.385, 386 & 387/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Pan: Agfpg8929H Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate (Hybrid) राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 15/10/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Ravish Sood, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam-3, Dated 21/03/2025, 24/03/2025 & 16/04/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Respective Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 Of The Income Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi Vs. Acit Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, "The Act”), Dated 27/03/2023; Under Section 271Aac(1) Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023; & Under Section 270A Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. As The Facts Involved In The Captioned Appeals Are Inextricably Interwoven, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69

properties (assets). Accordingly, the AO worked out the unexplained investment made by the assessee during the subject year at Rs. 21,35,549/-, as under: Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi vs. ACIT 10. Thereafter, the AO vide his order under section 147 of the Act, dated 27/03/2023, determined the income of the assessee at Rs. 36,38,936/-. Also, the AO while

VIKRAM BRAHMENDRA SATYAJIT MULPURI,KRISHNA DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VIJAYAWADA

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

ITA 534/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.534/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Vikram Brahmendra Satyajit Vs. Income Tax Officer, Mulpuri, Ward-3(1), Krishna District. Vijayawada. Pan: Aonpm1893G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 02/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 19/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

property (as per SRO, Patamata): Rs.56,58,000/-, but not filed his return of income, initiated proceedings under section 148A of the Act. Thereafter, 3 Vikram Brahmendra Satyajit Mulpuri vs. ITO the AO issued notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 23/03/2024. In compliance, the assessee filed his return of income in response to the notice under section