YALAMANCHILI NEELIMA,,GUNTUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2),, GUNTUR

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

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

section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act considered the property as 3 transferred during the assessment year 2016-17. The Ld. AO noticing that the assessee has not filed return of income for the AY 2016-17 believed that the income chargeable to tax escaped assessment and notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued and served

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

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

234A and Section 234B as consequential to the additions made. 12. For these and such other grounds, that may be urged at the time of hearing of subject appeal, the appellant prays before the Hon'ble ITAT that the Assessment be quashed or directions be given to the Ld.AO to delete the additions made or provide such other relief

AUDREY BERNICE ROY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

section 143(1) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”), dated 27.01.2020 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: “1. The order of Ld. AO (CPC) as well as Ld CIT(A) are contrary to the facts and also the provisions / law applicable

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), GUNTUR vs. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE COUNCIL OF HIGHER EDUCATION , NEELADHRI TOWERS

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.376 & 377/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20) Asst. Cit– Circle – 1(1) V. Andhra Pradesh State Council 2Nd Floor, Standard House Of Higher Education Atmakur Village Nagarampalem – 522004 Mangalagiri-522503 Guntur, Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aamfa3316R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

234A and Rs.46,14,716 under section 234B of the Act. Page No. 3 I.T.A.Nos.376 & 377/VIZ/2024 Andhra Pradesh State Council of Higher Education 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and filed its submissions. After considering the submissions of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A) allowed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), GUNTUR vs. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE COUNCIL OF HIGHER EDUCATION , NEELADRI TOWERS

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.376 & 377/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20) Asst. Cit– Circle – 1(1) V. Andhra Pradesh State Council 2Nd Floor, Standard House Of Higher Education Atmakur Village Nagarampalem – 522004 Mangalagiri-522503 Guntur, Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aamfa3316R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

234A and Rs.46,14,716 under section 234B of the Act. Page No. 3 I.T.A.Nos.376 & 377/VIZ/2024 Andhra Pradesh State Council of Higher Education 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and filed its submissions. After considering the submissions of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A) allowed

VENKATA SURYANARAYANA VISWANADHAM,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, VIZIANAGARAM

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Balakrishnan. Sassessment Year: 2015-16 Venkata Suryanarayana Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Viswanadham, Vizayanagaram. Vizianagaram. Pan : Adnpv5136A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar (Hybrid) Revenue By: Ms. K. Sandhya Rani, Sr.Dr. Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.01.2025

234A, 234B, and 234C of the Act.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee had not filed any return of income u/s 139 of the Act. Consequently, a notice under Section 148A(d) was issued on 02.04.2022, followed by a notice under Section 148 on 03.04.2022. In response, the assessee declared an income

KANCHAN LALWANI,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIZIANAGARAM

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

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

234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, the same may kindly be deleted. 10. The appellant seeks permission to add any other ground of appeal or amend or alter the aforesaid ground of appeal.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual and filed her return of income declaring total income