MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

seizure operations. We also find that the purchase of capital goods and the depreciation claimed by the assessee was very much available before the Ld. AO while framing the assessment U/s. 143(3) of the Act. The relevant financials including the P & L Account, Balance Sheet and Schedules, Tax Audit Report were available before the Ld. AO which was considered

MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

seizure operations. We also find that the purchase of capital goods and the depreciation claimed by the assessee was very much available before the Ld. AO while framing the assessment U/s. 143(3) of the Act. The relevant financials including the P & L Account, Balance Sheet and Schedules, Tax Audit Report were available before the Ld. AO which was considered

MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

seizure operations. We also find that the purchase of capital goods and the depreciation claimed by the assessee was very much available before the Ld. AO while framing the assessment U/s. 143(3) of the Act. The relevant financials including the P & L Account, Balance Sheet and Schedules, Tax Audit Report were available before the Ld. AO which was considered

MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

seizure operations. We also find that the purchase of capital goods and the depreciation claimed by the assessee was very much available before the Ld. AO while framing the assessment U/s. 143(3) of the Act. The relevant financials including the P & L Account, Balance Sheet and Schedules, Tax Audit Report were available before the Ld. AO which was considered

MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

seizure operations. We also find that the purchase of capital goods and the depreciation claimed by the assessee was very much available before the Ld. AO while framing the assessment U/s. 143(3) of the Act. The relevant financials including the P & L Account, Balance Sheet and Schedules, Tax Audit Report were available before the Ld. AO which was considered

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GUNTUR vs. MADHUSUSHANA VENKATA SUBBA RAO POTTI, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

search and seizure proceedings, Shri Tandra Ramesh, Director of JBRMPL has not mentioned the name of M/s. Vijayasai Laxmi Srinivasa Cotton Mills in any of the sworn statements recorded on 02.01.2017, 03.01.2017, 17.02.2017 and 24.02.2017 and neither in the Affidavit filed before ADIT(Inv), Unit II(1), Hyderabad on 03.03.2017. However, he has mentioned the name of the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1(1),, GUNTUR vs. POTTI KUMARA NAGA VENKATA SAI CHAKRAVARTHY, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

search and seizure proceedings, Shri Tandra Ramesh, Director of JBRMPL has not mentioned the name of M/s. Vijayasai Laxmi Srinivasa Cotton Mills in any of the sworn statements recorded on 02.01.2017, 03.01.2017, 17.02.2017 and 24.02.2017 and neither in the Affidavit filed before ADIT(Inv), Unit II(1), Hyderabad on 03.03.2017. However, he has mentioned the name of the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), GUNTUR vs. SHIVANI COTTON INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

search and seizure proceedings, Shri Tandra Ramesh, Director of JBRMPL has not mentioned the name of M/s. Vijayasai Laxmi Srinivasa Cotton Mills in any of the sworn statements recorded on 02.01.2017, 03.01.2017, 17.02.2017 and 24.02.2017 and neither in the Affidavit filed before ADIT(Inv), Unit II(1), Hyderabad on 03.03.2017. However, he has mentioned the name of the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , GUNTUR vs. MS.VIJAYASAI LAKSHMI SRINIVASA COTTON MILLS, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

search and seizure proceedings, Shri Tandra Ramesh, Director of JBRMPL has not mentioned the name of M/s. Vijayasai Laxmi Srinivasa Cotton Mills in any of the sworn statements recorded on 02.01.2017, 03.01.2017, 17.02.2017 and 24.02.2017 and neither in the Affidavit filed before ADIT(Inv), Unit II(1), Hyderabad on 03.03.2017. However, he has mentioned the name of the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. L V BEACH CITY PROPERTY PROMOTERS, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 254/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) Asst. Cit – Central Circle – 2 V. L.V. Beach City Property Promoters 40-25-19/A, Balaji Towers 5Th Floor, Shiva Towers Kogantivari Street, Patamatalanka Danavaipeta, Rajahmundry-533103 Vijayawada – 520010 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aacfl5214D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) सी.ओ सं. / C.O. No. 3/Viz/2024 [आयकअपीलसं. से उत्पन्न / Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.254/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19)] L.V. Beach City Property Promoters V. Asst. Cit – Central Circle – 2 40-25-19/A, Balaji Towers 5Th Floor, Shiva Towers Kogantivari Street, Patamatalanka Danavaipeta, Rajahmundry-533103 Vijayawada – 520010 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aacfl5214D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व / Assessee Represented By : Shri M.V. Prasad, Ar राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व / Department Represented By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

seizure operations were also carried in the case of M/s. Usha Bala Group for the entities a) M/s.Usha Pictures and Financiers, b) M/s. Usha Bala Chits Pvt Ltd., c) M/s. Usha Bala Agro Farms Pvt Ltd; and d) M/s. Usha Bala Real Estate; whereas all situated at Raja Rammohan Rai Street, Powerpet Eluru. Various documents were found to be Page

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA vs. VEDMUTHA ELECTRICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us:

seizure proceedings conducted in the case of Oneworld group Vedumutha Electricals India Private Limited. of case on 06.11.2019 the assessee company was a beneficiary of bogus loan entries of Rs. 1 crore received from M/s Aneri Fincap Limited, a paper company which was not doing any genuine business activity but was only providing bogus accommodation entries to various beneficiaries. Apart

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA vs. VEDMUTHA ELECTRICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us:

seizure proceedings conducted in the case of Oneworld group Vedumutha Electricals India Private Limited. of case on 06.11.2019 the assessee company was a beneficiary of bogus loan entries of Rs. 1 crore received from M/s Aneri Fincap Limited, a paper company which was not doing any genuine business activity but was only providing bogus accommodation entries to various beneficiaries. Apart

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA vs. VEDMUTHA ELECTRICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us:

seizure proceedings conducted in the case of Oneworld group Vedumutha Electricals India Private Limited. of case on 06.11.2019 the assessee company was a beneficiary of bogus loan entries of Rs. 1 crore received from M/s Aneri Fincap Limited, a paper company which was not doing any genuine business activity but was only providing bogus accommodation entries to various beneficiaries. Apart

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, VIJAYAWADA vs. VEDMUTHA ELECTRICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us:

seizure proceedings conducted in the case of Oneworld group Vedumutha Electricals India Private Limited. of case on 06.11.2019 the assessee company was a beneficiary of bogus loan entries of Rs. 1 crore received from M/s Aneri Fincap Limited, a paper company which was not doing any genuine business activity but was only providing bogus accommodation entries to various beneficiaries. Apart

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA vs. VEDMUTHA ELECTRICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us:

seizure proceedings conducted in the case of Oneworld group Vedumutha Electricals India Private Limited. of case on 06.11.2019 the assessee company was a beneficiary of bogus loan entries of Rs. 1 crore received from M/s Aneri Fincap Limited, a paper company which was not doing any genuine business activity but was only providing bogus accommodation entries to various beneficiaries. Apart

SATYA VENKATA KRISHNA RAVI PRASAD KODURI,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, RAJAHMUNDRY

Seizure operation under section\n132 of the Act was conducted on 28.01.2021 in the group case of Sri Godavari\nSatya Venkata Phani Bhushan. The case was later centralized with the approval\nof the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Visakhapatnam. During the\ncourse of search proceedings under section 132 of the Act in the case of Sri\nGodavari Satya Venkata

SATYA VENKATA KRISHNA RAVI PRASAD KODURI,EAST GODHAVARI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, RAJAHMUNDRY

Seizure operation under section\n132 of the Act was conducted on 28.01.2021 in the group case of Sri Godavari\nSatya Venkata Phani Bhushan. The case was later centralized with the approval\nof the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Visakhapatnam. During the\ncourse of search proceedings under section 132 of the Act in the case of Sri\nGodavari Satya Venkata

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , VISKAHAPATNAM vs. SRI VIJAYA VISAKHA MILK PRODUCERS COMPANY LIMITED,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue and the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed for the A

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.239/Viz/2020 & 237/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2012-13 &2013-14) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Sri Vijaya Visakha Milk Income Tax Producers Company Limited Central Circle-2 Visakha Diary, Bhpv Post Visakhapatnam Nh-5, Nathayyapalem Visakhapatnam [Pan :Aajcs7398P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

seizure operations and the seized material was not sufficient to establish the concealment of income. The Ld.AR relied on the following cases : (i) Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Neeraj Jindal (2017) 393 ITR 0001 (Delhi) (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Rajiv Garg & Ors (2009) 313 ITR 0256 (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Aero Traders