THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VITTALAM NATARAJ PRASAD, TIRUPATI

In the result, Cross Objection raised by the assessee is dismissed

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

properties purchased, investments, loans and advances during the FY 2013-14 and also asked to furnish the sources towards cash deposits in bank accounts. In response the Assessee’s Representative furnished the copies of the housing loan maintained at Andhra Bank, Tirupati. The Ld. AR submitted that the loans were claimed as expenditure as the loan is utilized for personal

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VITTALAM NATARAJ PRASAD, TIRUPATI

In the result, Cross Objection raised by the assessee is dismissed

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

properties purchased, investments, loans and advances during the FY 2013-14 and also asked to furnish the sources towards cash deposits in bank accounts. In response the Assessee’s Representative furnished the copies of the housing loan maintained at Andhra Bank, Tirupati. The Ld. AR submitted that the loans were claimed as expenditure as the loan is utilized for personal

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NALLAMILLI SRIDEVI,, TIRUPATI

In the result, Cross Objection raised by the assessee is dismissed

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

properties purchased, investments, loans and advances during the FY 2013-14 and also asked to furnish the sources towards cash deposits in bank accounts. In response the Assessee’s Representative furnished the copies of the housing loan maintained at Andhra Bank, Tirupati. The Ld. AR submitted that the loans were claimed as expenditure as the loan is utilized for personal

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)

65,00,000/- made U/s. 68 is illegal, invalid and bad in law; 6. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in not considering that assessee has specifically objected the stamp duty value, therefore confirming addition made U/s. 56(2)(x)(b) * B of Rs. 45,40,70/- without referring matter to DVO on assumption

MANPREET SINGH LAMBA,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3), VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 292/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Manpreet Singh Lamba V. Income Tax Officer – Ward-3(3) 54-20-212, Jawahar Auto Nagar Central Revenue Buildings Iind Cross Road Bandar Road Vijayawada – 520007 Vijayawada – 520002 Ntr District, Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aampl1721D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

section 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) dated 19.12.2019 for the A.Y. 2017-18. 2. At the outset, it is noticed from the appeal record that there is a delay of 107 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Explaining the reasons for belated filing of the appeal, the Ld. Authorised Representative [hereinafter “Ld.AR”] drew

VASUDHA SHELTERS,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSIATANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.227/Viz/2023 & 228/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) M/S Vasudha Shelters Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of D.No.27-23-31, Gopala Reddy Street Income Tax Governorpet Circle-1(1) Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan : Aagfv6727K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

65,564/-. The assessment order passed by the AO was considered as erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Hence, case was reopened u/s 263 of the Act by the then jurisdictional CIT and order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act was passed on 21.03.2018 assessing the total income at Rs.53

VASUDHA SHELTERS,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.227/Viz/2023 & 228/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) M/S Vasudha Shelters Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of D.No.27-23-31, Gopala Reddy Street Income Tax Governorpet Circle-1(1) Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan : Aagfv6727K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

65,564/-. The assessment order passed by the AO was considered as erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Hence, case was reopened u/s 263 of the Act by the then jurisdictional CIT and order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act was passed on 21.03.2018 assessing the total income at Rs.53

NANNAPANENI SAILAJA,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

house wife and left with two unmarried\ndaughters. The sudden death of the husband left the family in a shock. The\nappellant did not have any idea of the income tax proceedings. She does\nnot know the details of the email and other login details of her account in\nthe income tax portal. As such, she was not aware

SRI SAHASRALINGESWARA SWAMY TEMPLE,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), GUNTUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis for the A

Bench: The Tribunal, The Assessee Filed Appeals (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”] Vide Respective Din & Order No. As Stated Below: -

65,990/-. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before us by raising following grounds of appeal: - “Ground No-1:- The appellant is a Temple Religious Trust having registration Under Section - 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 17-07- 2017 and there was no change in constitution as it belongs

SRI SAHASRALINGESWARA SWAMY TEMPLE,PONNUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD, GUNTUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis for the A

Bench: The Tribunal, The Assessee Filed Appeals (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”] Vide Respective Din & Order No. As Stated Below: -

65,990/-. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before us by raising following grounds of appeal: - “Ground No-1:- The appellant is a Temple Religious Trust having registration Under Section - 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 17-07- 2017 and there was no change in constitution as it belongs

SRI SAHASRALINGESWARA SWAMY,PONNUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD, GUNTUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis for the A

Bench: The Tribunal, The Assessee Filed Appeals (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”] Vide Respective Din & Order No. As Stated Below: -

65,990/-. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before us by raising following grounds of appeal: - “Ground No-1:- The appellant is a Temple Religious Trust having registration Under Section - 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 17-07- 2017 and there was no change in constitution as it belongs

SRI SAHASRALINGESWARA SWAMY TEMPLE,PONNUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD, GUNTUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis for the A

Bench: The Tribunal, The Assessee Filed Appeals (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”] Vide Respective Din & Order No. As Stated Below: -

65,990/-. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before us by raising following grounds of appeal: - “Ground No-1:- The appellant is a Temple Religious Trust having registration Under Section - 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 17-07- 2017 and there was no change in constitution as it belongs

SRINIVASA RAO CHUNDURI,TANUKU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, TANUKU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.235/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-14) Srinivasa Rao Chunduri V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2 D.No. 33-8-20(4), Satya Homes Income Tax Office Kanchi Raju Vari Street Aayakar Bhavan Babu Gari Street, Tanuku – 534211 Sajjapuram, Tanuku – 534211 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Adwpc3135D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

65,00,000/-. It was observed that as per SRO, the market value of the property is Rs. 1,70,31,960/- and since the Chivatam Village is under the Municipal Limits of Tanuku Municipality, the provisions of section 50C of the Act are applicable. The assessee has not filed any return of income for the A.Y. 2015-16. Therefore