SRI DHARIPALLI SAMPATH,,,WRANGAL vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the A

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

cash deposits, but the assessee failed to explain the sources with tangible evidences. In the search assessments to be framed u/s 153A, the AO is required to assess or reassess

SRI DHARIPALLI SAMPATH,,WRANGAL vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the A

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

cash deposits, but the assessee failed to explain the sources with tangible evidences. In the search assessments to be framed u/s 153A, the AO is required to assess or reassess

SRI DHARIPALLI SAMPATH,, ,WRANGAL vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the A

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

cash deposits, but the assessee failed to explain the sources with tangible evidences. In the search assessments to be framed u/s 153A, the AO is required to assess or reassess

SRI DHARIPALLI SAMPATH,,WRANGAL vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the A

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

cash deposits, but the assessee failed to explain the sources with tangible evidences. In the search assessments to be framed u/s 153A, the AO is required to assess or reassess

SRI DHARIPALLI SAMPATH,,WRANGAL vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the A

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

cash deposits, but the assessee failed to explain the sources with tangible evidences. In the search assessments to be framed u/s 153A, the AO is required to assess or reassess

SRI DHARIPALLI SAMPATH,,WARANGAL vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the A

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

cash deposits, but the assessee failed to explain the sources with tangible evidences. In the search assessments to be framed u/s 153A, the AO is required to assess or reassess

BADETI VENKATESWARA RAO,ATTILI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.356/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Badeti Venkateswara Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.17-44, Poleramma Temple St., Ward-1 Attili, West Godavari Dist. Tanuku [Pan : Azzpb8511H]

deposits made in the savings bank account and the case was not converted into full scrutiny. Therefore, the AO is not permitted to travel beyond the scope of the case for which it was selected, unless the case is being converted into full scrutiny with the approval of Chief Commissioner 8 I.T.A. No.356 /Viz/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 Badeti Venkateswara

A.SRINIVASA RAO,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.518/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2009-10) Sri A.Srinivasa Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.48-13-20/1, F.No.Sf2 Ward-1(4) Sri Krishna Sai Residency Visakhapatnam Janaki Rama Street Visakhapatnam [Pan :Adhpa2185Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

cash credits made in the books of accounts for which the assessee could not explain the source to the satisfaction of the AO, required to be brought to tax u/s 68 of the Act. In the instant case, the deposits were made in the bank account. As per the settled issue, the bank deposits required to be made addition

GHANTA PUNNA RAO,GUNTUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), , GUNTUR

In the result, the appeal and cross objection filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.179/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-2012) Ghanta Punna Rao Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Varandas Apartments Income Tax 1/3, Navabharat Nagar Circle-2(1) Guntur Guntur [Pan : Adupg3613J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.354/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-2012) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. Ghanta Punna Rao Income Tax 3Rd Floor, Varandas Apartments Circle-2(1) 1/3, Navabharat Nagar Guntur Guntur [Pan : Adupg3613J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.124/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.354/Viz/2019) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-2012) Ghanta Punna Rao Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Varandas Apartments Income Tax 1/3, Navabharat Nagar Circle-2(1) Guntur Guntur [Pan : Adupg3613J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

reassessment proceedings, the AO found that the assessee has made cash deposits in Andhra Bank, Brundavan Gardens Branch, Guntur, during

THE ITO., VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI MUDDA ANIL KUMAR,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.42/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12) Income Tax Officer Vs. Sri Mudda Anil Kumar, Ward-3(2) Prop : M/S Nandini Food Vijayawada Products D.No.21-10/5-35B Teachers Colony Srinagar Colony Vijayawada [Pan :Alspm7148N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

cash deposit and the withdrawal, it is correct to make the addition of peak credit balance, but not the entire deposits which the Ld.CIT(A) has directed the AO. Hence, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) and the same is upheld. The appeal of the revenue on this ground is dismissed

P.SUDARSHAN,,`VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), , VISAKHAPTNAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.53/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08) P.Sudarshan Vs. Income Tax Officer 33-12-35, Devangula Veedhi Ward-1(2) Allipuram Direct Taxes Building Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Ahwpp6272G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri C.Sanjeevarao, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing 31.01.2023 : घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.02.2023

cash deposits. Further, the Ld.CIT(A) also directed the AO to estimate the profit at 3.5% on the turnover. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us and raised the following grounds : 1. That the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-1 [for short CIT(a)-1] erred in dismissing the appellant

GOWRIPATNAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,GOWRIPATNAM vs. ITO, WARD-1, TADEPALLIGUDEM

cash deposits. However, on the issue of deduction claimed under\nsection 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, Ld. AO observing that the return was filed in\nresponse to notice under section 148 of the Act and not within the due date\nunder section 139(1) of the Act denied the deduction claimed by the assessee.\nFurther, Ld. AO also

GOWRIPATNAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,GOWRIPATNAM vs. ITO, WARD-1, TADEPALLIGUDEM

cash deposits. However, on the issue of deduction claimed under\nsection 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, Ld. AO observing that the return was filed in\nresponse to notice under section 148 of the Act and not within the due date\nPage. No 3\nI.T.A.Nos.432, 433 & 434/VIZ/2025\nGowripatnam Primary Agricultural Cooperative\nCredit Society Limited --\nunder section

GOWRIPATNAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,GOWRIPATNAM vs. ITO, WARD-1, TADEPALLIGUDEM

cash deposits. However, on the issue of deduction claimed under\nsection 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, Ld. AO observing that the return was filed in\nresponse to notice under section 148 of the Act and not within the due date\nunder section 139(1) of the Act denied the deduction claimed by the assessee.\nFurther, Ld. AO also

NANNEBOYINA KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (WARD IT), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.104/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2016-17) Nanneboyina Kalyan Chakravarthy V. Income Tax Officer C/O. C.R. Hemanthkumar Ward International Taxation Cr Building, 1St Floor Annex. H.No 9-14-4/7, Flat No. 7 M.G. Road, Vijayawada Sowbhagyaapartments Andhra Pradesh – 520002 Cbm Compound, Vip Road Andhra Pradesh - 530003 [Pan: Cuepk3530P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

deposits jn the bank are below Rs.50 lacs, i.e. Rs.26,72,500/- and therefore, the reassessment proceedings are legally untenable and deserve to be quashed. 3. The Ld.DRP failed to appreciate the fact that the initiation of proceedings u/s 148, based on incorrect figures that cash

VULLI RADHAKRISHNA,TUNI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TUNI

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.359/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vulli Radhakrishna, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Tuni. Ward-1, Pan: Aegpv1751H Tuni. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 04/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 19/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 17/03/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short “A.O.”) Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”) Dated 26/03/2022 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2 Vulli Radhakrishna Vs. Ito

cash 3 Vulli Radhakrishna vs. ITO deposits in bank: Rs.2,50,000/-; (iv) purchase of equity shares in a recognized stock exchange: Rs.3,76,565/-; and (v) sale of equity shares: Rs.1,68,662/-, initiated proceedings under section 147 of the Act. Notice under section 148 of the Act was issued by the AO. In compliance, the assessee filed

NIMMANA NARASIMHARAO,ELURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, ELURU

Bench: Us:

cash deposits of Rs.65,50,000/- as having been sourced out of the assessee’s undisclosed sources u/s 69 of the Act. 7 Nimmana Narasimharao 10. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A), but without success. For the sake of clarity, the observations of the CIT(A) are culled out as under: 8 Nimmana Narasimharao

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TENALI vs. SURYAPRAKASARAO KANAPARTHY, BETHAPUDI, REPALLE

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations, while for the appeal filed by the revenue having been rendered as academic in nature, is ...

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.239/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Suryaprakasarao Tenali. Kanaparthy, Bethapudi, Repalle, Bapatla. Pan: Dmqpk7509P (Appellant) (Respondent)

deposited. The other credits in the bank account have been received by the appellant from his company through RTGS/NEFT. Further it has been stated that all the funds received in this case is only from the company and does not belong to the appellant. Mere cash withdrawal from the bank account cannot constitute income. The AO has not been able