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.

35 results for “house property”+ Unexplained Investmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi636Mumbai565Jaipur230Chennai222Hyderabad208Bangalore206Chandigarh111Cochin102Ahmedabad87Indore76Pune74Rajkot63Nagpur60Amritsar48Kolkata41Raipur35Visakhapatnam35Surat35Lucknow28Guwahati27Agra26Patna17Jodhpur13Allahabad10Cuttack8SC4Jabalpur4Dehradun3Panaji2Varanasi2H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)33Addition to Income25Section 271(1)(c)22Section 143(2)19Section 14718Unexplained Investment17Section 6914Section 142(1)13Section 148

GOLAGANI SREENIVAS,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 467/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam06 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.467/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2016-17) Golagani Sreenivas V. Income Tax Officer – Ward-5(1) D.No. 18-97 Income Tax Office Old Diary Farm, Pedagadili Direct Taxes Building Visakhapatnam – 530040 Mvp Colony Andhra Pradesh Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Agopg4394D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 69

investment in property as compared to total income". The reason as per the CASS is that the assessee has acquired Immovable property, the sources of which are required to be examined. Accordingly notice under 143(2) of the Act dated 18.09.2017 was issued and served on the assessee through ITBA. In response, assessee filed copy of registered purchase document

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2

12
Cash Deposit12
Survey u/s 133A11
Section 153C10
ITA 399/VIZ/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Nov 2025AY 2013-14
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

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

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SRI BHAGAVAN NIKETAN LIMITED, KOLLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 118/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.118/Viz/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Sri Bhagavan Niketan Tax , Central Circle-2, Limited, Visakhapatnam. D.No. V-122/A/1, Quality Haat, 1St Floor, Room No.4, S Aj Farooque Road, Metlabruz, Kolkata-32, Pin: 700018. Pan: Aadcs 7326 M (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

For Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

houses at Marripalem, Visakhapatnam in the name and style of ‘Happy Homes’, did not file its return of income for the AY 2017-18. A search and seizure operation U/s. 132 of the Act was conducted on 15/09/2017 by the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit- III(1), Visakhapatnam at the Registered Office premises of the 4 assessee-company

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DOLPHIN HIGHRISE PRIVATE LIMITED,, KILKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 120/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.118/Viz/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Sri Bhagavan Niketan Tax , Central Circle-2, Limited, Visakhapatnam. D.No. V-122/A/1, Quality Haat, 1St Floor, Room No.4, S Aj Farooque Road, Metlabruz, Kolkata-32, Pin: 700018. Pan: Aadcs 7326 M (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

For Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

houses at Marripalem, Visakhapatnam in the name and style of ‘Happy Homes’, did not file its return of income for the AY 2017-18. A search and seizure operation U/s. 132 of the Act was conducted on 15/09/2017 by the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit- III(1), Visakhapatnam at the Registered Office premises of the 4 assessee-company

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ALAKRAM INTERNATIONAL TRADING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 151/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.118/Viz/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Sri Bhagavan Niketan Tax , Central Circle-2, Limited, Visakhapatnam. D.No. V-122/A/1, Quality Haat, 1St Floor, Room No.4, S Aj Farooque Road, Metlabruz, Kolkata-32, Pin: 700018. Pan: Aadcs 7326 M (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

For Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

houses at Marripalem, Visakhapatnam in the name and style of ‘Happy Homes’, did not file its return of income for the AY 2017-18. A search and seizure operation U/s. 132 of the Act was conducted on 15/09/2017 by the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit- III(1), Visakhapatnam at the Registered Office premises of the 4 assessee-company

POTLURI PHANENDRA BABU,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 241/VIZ/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Aug 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.241 & 242/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2012-13) Potluri Phanendra Babu, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-3(2), Pan: Agspp 7638 K Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 15/06/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 10/08/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

unexplained cash deposits in the bank account to the extent of Rs. 28 lakhs as the assessee has satisfactorily explained the sources for deposits in the bank account. Further, with respect to the investment in the property to the extent of Rs. 23,24,790/- the Ld. CIT(A) has considered an amount of Rs. 10 lakhs and held

POTLURI PHANENDRA BABU,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 242/VIZ/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.241 & 242/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2012-13) Potluri Phanendra Babu, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-3(2), Pan: Agspp 7638 K Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 15/06/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 10/08/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

unexplained cash deposits in the bank account to the extent of Rs. 28 lakhs as the assessee has satisfactorily explained the sources for deposits in the bank account. Further, with respect to the investment in the property to the extent of Rs. 23,24,790/- the Ld. CIT(A) has considered an amount of Rs. 10 lakhs and held

SRINIVAS REDDY,TANUKU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

ITA 261/VIZ/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Oct 2025AY 2012-13
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

house property and also being a partner in M/s. Srinivasa Poultry\nComplex filed his return of income on 30.09.2012 admitting a total income of\nRs.11,19,090/-. A survey operation under section 133A of the Act was\nconducted on 13.12.2011 in the case of M/s. Laxmi Prasanna Agro Paper\nIndustries Limited where the assessee has made some investments

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. Y.JOJI REDDY, HYDERABAD

In the result, cross objections raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 327/VIZ/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

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

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

investment of Rs.42,28,500/- (v) The CIT(A) has not passed a speaking order on the issues decided. (vi) Any other ground with the permission of the Court.” 6. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 relates to the sources of the unsecured loans amounting to Rs. 74.02 Lakhs. Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] submitted that assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. Y.LOURDU REDDY, HYDERABAD

In the result, cross objections raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 328/VIZ/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Sept 2024AY 2007-08

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

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

investment of Rs.42,28,500/- (v) The CIT(A) has not passed a speaking order on the issues decided. (vi) Any other ground with the permission of the Court.” 6. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 relates to the sources of the unsecured loans amounting to Rs. 74.02 Lakhs. Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] submitted that assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. Y.JOJI REDDY, HYDERABAD

In the result, cross objections raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 325/VIZ/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Sept 2024AY 2007-08

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

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

investment of Rs.42,28,500/- (v) The CIT(A) has not passed a speaking order on the issues decided. (vi) Any other ground with the permission of the Court.” 6. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 relates to the sources of the unsecured loans amounting to Rs. 74.02 Lakhs. Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] submitted that assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. Y.JOJI REDDY, HYDERABAD

In the result, cross objections raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 326/VIZ/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Sept 2024AY 2008-09

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

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

investment of Rs.42,28,500/- (v) The CIT(A) has not passed a speaking order on the issues decided. (vi) Any other ground with the permission of the Court.” 6. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 relates to the sources of the unsecured loans amounting to Rs. 74.02 Lakhs. Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] submitted that assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GUNTUR vs. ANNAPURNA RAJAVARAPU, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 285/VIZ/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 143(3)Section 69

House, Nagaramapalem Flat No. A2, Srihari Vasam Guntur – 522004, Andhra Pradesh 1/1 Vidya Nagar, Guntur – 522007 Andhra Pradesh [PAN: AFSPR9778M] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented by : Shri M.C. Rao, CA राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented by : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 11.06.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date

KODALI SURESH BABU,LABBIPET vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 231/VIZ/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T. (It). A. No.231/Viz/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2016-17) Kodali Suresh Babu, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Labbipet. Ward (International Taxation), Pan: Atwpk 8835 C Vijayawada. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26/03/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 18/04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan:

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69

unexplained investment in purchases of property. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in not accepting the amount of Rs. 95,00,000/- paid by the father of the appellant as a source for the investment in purchase of property. Any other grounds may be urged at the time of hearing.” 5. 4. Grounds No. 1 & 5 are general

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

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 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

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

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

ITA 484/VIZ/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 56(2)(x)Section 68

investment amounting to Rs.1,10,20,375/- [i.e., Rs.70,46,875/- + Rs.39,73,500/-]. Further, the Assessing Officer 5 noted in the assessment order the income tax returns filed by the assessee from the financial year 2001-2002 to 2006-2007, 2008- 2009 to 2020-2021 and her admitted income totalling to Rs.79,88,483/- which was tabulated

SATYAVATHI GOLKONDA,MACHILIPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MACHILIPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

ITA 219/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 219/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17) Satyavathi Golkonda, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mig-102, Old Aphb Colony, Aayakar Bhavan, Paraspet, Machilipatnam, Krishna District, Machilipatnam, Andhra Pradesh – 521001. Andhra Pradesh-521001. Pan: Attpg1361J (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri K. Siva Ram Kumar, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/08/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 08/08/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri K. Siva Ram Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

property. Therefore, the Ld. AO treated Rs. 7,00,000/- as unexplained investment U/s. 69 of the Act and added the same to the total income of the assessee. The Ld. AO further added a sum of Rs. 42,050/- disallowing the assessee’s claim of salary income since the assessee assessee has not filed the return of income

HARESH KUMAR LALWANI,VIZIANAGARAM vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, VISHAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 264/VIZ/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.264/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2021-22) Haresh Kumar Lalwani V. Pr.Cit -1 22-1-22, Ambati Satram Junction Aayakar Bhavan, Daba Gardens Vizianagaram – 535002 Visakhapatnam – 530020 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaqpt9248P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(x)Section 69A

house property of Rs. 3,26,665/-. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny in respect of cash deposits and purchase of immovable property and the Ld. AO has completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 19.12.2022 determining the total income of Rs.73,71,744/- by making addition of Rs.35