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.

24 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Unexplained Investmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi702Mumbai624Jaipur255Ahmedabad233Hyderabad168Indore142Chennai138Pune132Kolkata99Surat79Bangalore77Chandigarh70Rajkot68Calcutta35Amritsar29Raipur27Agra26Nagpur24Visakhapatnam24Allahabad24Cuttack21Cochin19Lucknow18Ranchi12Patna10Dehradun9Jodhpur8Guwahati7Jabalpur7Telangana2Punjab & Haryana1Varanasi1Karnataka1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)48Section 143(3)34Section 153A25Addition to Income20Section 14817Penalty15Section 14710Section 13210Section 263

OMCON REIGN FOREST PROJECTS,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 81/VIZ/2018[213-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Dec 2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.80-82 /Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2014-15 Respectively) M/S Omcon Reign Forest Projects Vs. Principal Commissioner Of S.No.180, Opp.Toyoto Income Tax-1 Show Room Visakhapatnam Paradesi Palem Village Madhurawada Visakhapatnam [Pan :Aacfo5604J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri C.Subrahmanyam, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

unexplained investment in the form of deposits made-in-the bank account. Consequently re-assessment was made by the A.0. The A.0. in the re-assessment order did not initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

10
Disallowance10
Undisclosed Income9
Unexplained Cash Credit9

OMCON REIGN FOREST PROJECTS, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 82/VIZ/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.80-82 /Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2014-15 Respectively) M/S Omcon Reign Forest Projects Vs. Principal Commissioner Of S.No.180, Opp.Toyoto Income Tax-1 Show Room Visakhapatnam Paradesi Palem Village Madhurawada Visakhapatnam [Pan :Aacfo5604J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri C.Subrahmanyam, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

unexplained investment in the form of deposits made-in-the bank account. Consequently re-assessment was made by the A.0. The A.0. in the re-assessment order did not initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. HARI PRASAD BHARARIA, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue as well as C

ITA 532/VIZ/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleacit, Central Circle-1, Vs. Sri Hari Prasad Bhararia, Visakhapatnam. B-101, Vuda Apartments, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Ablpb 6853 A (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No.43/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 532/Viz/2018) (Asst. Year : 2009-10) Sri Hari Prasad Bhararia, Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, B-101, Vuda Apartments, Visakhapatnam. Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Ablpb 6853 A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Sonawal – Sr.DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 271Section 274Section 292Section 292B

unexplained investment of Rs. 11,42,500/- in M/s. Alakananda Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. 5. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. As against the order of the ld. CIT(A), the Department

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)

penalty of Rs. 4,45,924/- U/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act citing that the Ld. CIT(A) has sustained the addition of Rs. 13,24,790/- as unexplained investment

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)

penalty of Rs. 4,45,924/- U/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act citing that the Ld. CIT(A) has sustained the addition of Rs. 13,24,790/- as unexplained investment

MALLA APPALARAJU,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 253/VIZ/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 May 2024AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 27(1)(c)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 69

unexplained investment U/s. 69, the Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the decision of the Ld.AO. Thereafter, the Ld. AO issued a show cause penalty notice U/s. 274 r.w.s 271

GINJALA ATCHIRAJU, L/R. OF GINJALA SIMHADRI RAJU, ,KAKINADA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, , KAKINADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 159/VIZ/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Sri G.V.N. Hari, ARFor Respondent: Sri Sankar Pandi, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

penalty order U/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act was passed on 28/06/2019. 2. The facts of the case are that a survey operation U/s. 133A of the Act was carried out in the case of the assessee on 20/07/2017. During the course of the survey operations, it was noticed that Sri Ginjala Simhadri Raju along with his daughter sold

CHANDRASEKHAR YERNENA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated herein above

ITA 125/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.125/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17) Chandrasekhar Yernena, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 39-31-68, Gandhi Nagar, Ward-4(1), Marripalem, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam-530018, Andhra Pradesh. Pan: Abqpy2029N (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri N.V. Ramana Murthy, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/06/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 10/09/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri N.V. Ramana Murthy, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

unexplained investment U/s. 69 of the Act. Further, the Ld. AO estimated the income of the assessee from liquor business ie., @ 5% on the total stock put to sale (Rs. 3,62,48,715/-) which worked out to Rs. 18,12,435/- and brought the same to tax. Accordingly, the Ld. AO completed the assessment U/s

SRINIVASA RAO BAMMIDI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 330/VIZ/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.330/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Srinivasa Rao Bammidi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 53-27-3/2, Krm Colony, Ward-2(1), Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam-530013, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh-530013. Pan:Akwpb1983F (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Sanjeevarao, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/10/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 24/10/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri C. Sanjeevarao, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

unexplained investment. In response to the show cause notice, the assessee furnished the details of sources for investment in shares trading of futures, equities and speculations of shares amounting to Rs. 2,13,837/-. However, the assessee did not furnish any details with regard to the source of investment in 3 shares transactions amounting to Rs. 2,00,000/-. Therefore

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, GUNTUR vs. SILEMANKHAN & MAHABOOBKHAN, GUNTUR

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

ITA 571/VIZ/2019[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Nov 2020AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.571/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-2017) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Silemankhan & Mahaboobkhan Income Tax D.No.15-11-16 Central Circle-2 Mangalagiri Road Guntur Guntur [Pan : Aaifs2791N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.149/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.571/Viz/2019) (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-2017) M/S Silemankhan & Vs. Deputy.Commissioner Of Mahaboobkhan Income Tax D.No.15-11-16 Central Circle-2 Mangalagiri Road Guntur Guntur [Pan : Aaifs2791N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, CA, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 271A

271 shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the undisclosed income referred to in sub-section (1). (3) The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section. Explanation.--For the purposes of this section,-- (a) "specified date" means the due date of furnishing

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), GUNTUR vs. MITTAPALLI RAJENDRA BABU,, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 22/VIZ/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.22/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri DJP Anand, DRFor Respondent: Shri I Kama Sastry, AR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Investment in Residential Building 10,00,000 6. Unexplained expenditure in construction 1,84,89,762 projects Total 4,21,38,038 3. The assessee filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 on 29.11.2014 admitting total income of Rs.4,21,48,620/-. The return filed by the assessee was processed after following due procedure

TUTA LAKSHMANA RAO,,ELURU vs. THE ITO,, ELURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 393/VIZ/2016[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Apr 2018AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.393/Viz/2016 (ननधधारण वषा/Assessment Year:2004-05) Tuta Lakshmana Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Prop :Chakri Bar & Restaurant Ward-1 Canal Road, Eluru- Eluru West Godavari District [Pan :Acbpt2971J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri K.C.Das, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 10.04.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 18 .04.2018 :

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri K.C.Das, DR
Section 175

invested an amount of Rs.33,75,000/- in the purchase of demand drafts for participating in the auction for issue of excise licence by Govt. of Andhra Pradesh. The AO has taken up the assessment for scrutiny and issued notice u/s 175 of the I.T.Act calling the assessee to file the return of income. During the course of assessment proceedings

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 173/VIZ/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are initiated separately.” In the same manner the AO made the addition Rs.1,05,91,037/- for the A.Y.2010-11. 25 I.T.A. Nos.168 to 174/Viz/2014 Arunachalam Manickavel, Guntur 18. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) prima facie agreed with the view

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 174/VIZ/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are initiated separately.” In the same manner the AO made the addition Rs.1,05,91,037/- for the A.Y.2010-11. 25 I.T.A. Nos.168 to 174/Viz/2014 Arunachalam Manickavel, Guntur 18. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) prima facie agreed with the view

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 169/VIZ/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are initiated separately.” In the same manner the AO made the addition Rs.1,05,91,037/- for the A.Y.2010-11. 25 I.T.A. Nos.168 to 174/Viz/2014 Arunachalam Manickavel, Guntur 18. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) prima facie agreed with the view

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 170/VIZ/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are initiated separately.” In the same manner the AO made the addition Rs.1,05,91,037/- for the A.Y.2010-11. 25 I.T.A. Nos.168 to 174/Viz/2014 Arunachalam Manickavel, Guntur 18. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) prima facie agreed with the view

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 172/VIZ/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are initiated separately.” In the same manner the AO made the addition Rs.1,05,91,037/- for the A.Y.2010-11. 25 I.T.A. Nos.168 to 174/Viz/2014 Arunachalam Manickavel, Guntur 18. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) prima facie agreed with the view

MYNENI VENKATA RAO,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 130/VIZ/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are initiated separately.” In the same manner the AO made the addition Rs.1,05,91,037/- for the A.Y.2010-11. 25 I.T.A. Nos.168 to 174/Viz/2014 Arunachalam Manickavel, Guntur 18. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) prima facie agreed with the view

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 168/VIZ/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Mar 2019AY 2004-05

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are initiated separately.” In the same manner the AO made the addition Rs.1,05,91,037/- for the A.Y.2010-11. 25 I.T.A. Nos.168 to 174/Viz/2014 Arunachalam Manickavel, Guntur 18. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) prima facie agreed with the view

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 171/VIZ/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are initiated separately.” In the same manner the AO made the addition Rs.1,05,91,037/- for the A.Y.2010-11. 25 I.T.A. Nos.168 to 174/Viz/2014 Arunachalam Manickavel, Guntur 18. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) prima facie agreed with the view