THANGIRALA IMMANUEL,PALAKOL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , PALAKOL

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.13 & 14/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वषा/Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2011-12) Thangirala Immanuel, Vs. Income Tax Officer Development Officer Ward-1 Lic Of India Palakol 1St Lane, Brodipeta Palakol (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.16/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वषा/Assessment Year : 2011-12) Avadhanula Srinivasa Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Development Officer Ward-1 Lic Of India Palakol 1St Lane, Brodipeta Palakol (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.25/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वषा/Assessment Year: 2011-12) Vs. Income Tax Officer Nuthalapati Ravi Shankar Development Officer Ward-1 Lic Of India Palakol 1St Lane, Brodipeta Palakol (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar निर्धाररती की ओर से / Assessee By : Smt.Suman Malik, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 30.04.2019 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29 .05.2019

reassessment proceedings the assessees have filed the reply stating that the exemption was claimed u/s 10(14), since, the amounts were wholly and exclusively spent on tour and travelling for mobilizing the business and are exempt under rule 2BB(1)(c) of the I.T.Rules. The AO considered the explanation of the assessee and not being satisfied with the explanation

THANGIRALA IMMANUEL,PALACOLE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , PALACOLE

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.13 & 14/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वषा/Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2011-12) Thangirala Immanuel, Vs. Income Tax Officer Development Officer Ward-1 Lic Of India Palakol 1St Lane, Brodipeta Palakol (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.16/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वषा/Assessment Year : 2011-12) Avadhanula Srinivasa Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Development Officer Ward-1 Lic Of India Palakol 1St Lane, Brodipeta Palakol (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.25/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वषा/Assessment Year: 2011-12) Vs. Income Tax Officer Nuthalapati Ravi Shankar Development Officer Ward-1 Lic Of India Palakol 1St Lane, Brodipeta Palakol (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar निर्धाररती की ओर से / Assessee By : Smt.Suman Malik, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 30.04.2019 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29 .05.2019

reassessment proceedings the assessees have filed the reply stating that the exemption was claimed u/s 10(14), since, the amounts were wholly and exclusively spent on tour and travelling for mobilizing the business and are exempt under rule 2BB(1)(c) of the I.T.Rules. The AO considered the explanation of the assessee and not being satisfied with the explanation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SHRI APPARAO MUKKAMALA, USA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed, while for the cross-objection filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI BALAKRISHNAN. S, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

14. As per first proviso total income is to be assessed or reassessed in respect of each of the assessment year. The second proviso provides that pending assessment or reassessment relating to the relevant preceding year on the date of initiation of search or requisition shall abate. Under the third proviso the Central Government may by Rules specify the class

VENKATA PRASAD PULIPATI,AMARAVATHI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), GUNTUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.612/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Venkata Prasad Pulipati, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Amaravathi. Ward-2(1), Pan: Asapp8796L Guntur. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri I. Kama Sastry, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 03/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 19/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order

10 Venkata Prasad Pulipati vs. ITO reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act had been revamped vide the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021. The substituted Sections 147 to 159 and Section 151 of the Act, applicable w.e.f. 01.04.2021 are culled out as under: “Income escaping assessment- 147. If any income chargeable to tax, in the case of an assessee

GRANDHI ANUPAMA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.266/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2012-13) Smt.Grandhi Anupama Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.26-08-62 Income Tax R.R.M.R.Road Circle-4(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aeepg9011P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.Manoj Kumar, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 05.11.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15 .11.2019 आदेश /O R D E R

reassess under Section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee wider Section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001". (Emphasis supplied) Rule 8D: Method for determining amount of expenditure in relation to Income not includible in total

ASHOK RUDRARAJU,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,WARD-2(5), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 439/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Ashok Rudraraju, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-2(5), Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aqvpr4058L

10. Per contra, Dr. Aparna Villuri, learned Senior Departmental Representative (for short “Ld. DR”), on being confronted with the aforesaid factual position as was canvassed before us, failed to rebut the same. However, the Ld. DR submitted that as the A.O., after validly assuming jurisdiction, had issued notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 27/07/2022, therefore, no infirmity emerges from

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DUVVURU REKHA REDDY, KURMANNAPALEM

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.450/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Vs. Income Tax Officer –Ward– 2(5) Duvvuru Rekha Reddy 2Nd Floor, Infinity Towers Flat No. 402, Vizag Profile Towers Sankaramatam Road Kurmannapalem Visakhapatnam - 530016 Visakhapatnam -530046 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Afdpr3780C] सी.ओ सं. / C.O. No. 17/Viz/2024 [आयकरअपीलसं.से उत्पन्न/I.T.A.No.450/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18)] Vs. Income Tax Officer –Ward– 2(5) Duvvuru Rekha Reddy 2Nd Floor, Infinity Towers Flat No. 402, Vizag Profile Towers Sankaramatam Road Kurmannapalem Visakhapatnam - 530016 Visakhapatnam - 530046 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Afdpr3780C]

10 I.T.A.No.450/VIZ/2024 C.O. No. 17/VIZ/2024 Duvvuru Rekha Reddy verified in the prescribed manner and setting forth such other particulars as may be prescribed; and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if such return were a return required to be furnished under section 139: Provided that no notice under this section shall

ABHILASH SYNERGETIC CONSTRUCTIONS & EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

reassessment proceedings also the assessee did not file the completion certificate hence the AO held that the assessee had violated the conditions specified ITA Nos. 108 & 109/VIZ/2019 (Abhilash Synergetic Constructions & Exports Pvt. Ltd.) u/s.80IB(10) and accordingly withdrawn the deduction allowed u/s 80IB and assessed the total income at Rs. 23,61,460/-. 5. Against the order of the Assessing

ABHILASH SYNERGETIC CONSTRUCTIONS & EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

reassessment proceedings also the assessee did not file the completion certificate hence the AO held that the assessee had violated the conditions specified ITA Nos. 108 & 109/VIZ/2019 (Abhilash Synergetic Constructions & Exports Pvt. Ltd.) u/s.80IB(10) and accordingly withdrawn the deduction allowed u/s 80IB and assessed the total income at Rs. 23,61,460/-. 5. Against the order of the Assessing

ABHILASH SYNERGETIC CONSTRUCTIONS & EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(5),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

reassessment proceedings also the assessee did not file the completion certificate hence the AO held that the assessee had violated the conditions specified ITA Nos. 108 & 109/VIZ/2019 (Abhilash Synergetic Constructions & Exports Pvt. Ltd.) u/s.80IB(10) and accordingly withdrawn the deduction allowed u/s 80IB and assessed the total income at Rs. 23,61,460/-. 5. Against the order of the Assessing

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. QUALITY STEEL SHOPPE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the Cross Objection No

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.454/Viz/2024 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Quality Steel Shoppe Ward-2(1), Private Limited, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaacq1115D (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 18/Viz/2024 (In आ.अपी.सं /454/Viz/2024) ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19)

reassessment under sections 147, 148 and 148A in a facless manner. 8. Per contra, Sri Badicala Yadagiri, Commissioner of Income Tax- Departmental Representative (for short “Ld. CIT-DR”), on being confronted with the aforesaid contentions as were canvassed before us, failed to rebut the same. However, the Ld. DR submitted that as the A.O., after validly assuming jurisdiction, had issued

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VIZAG RE-BARS PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.428/Viz/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dy. Cit – Circle – 3(1) Vs. M/S. Vizag Re-Bars Private Limited 35, 50-92-35, Sankara Matam Road Plot No. 1 Ida, Edulapaka Bonangi, Opposite Reliance Fresh Parawada Mandal – 531021 Beside Reliance Fresh, Near By Main Road Andhra Pradesh Madhuranagar, Dwaraka Nagar Visakhapatnam – 530016 [Pan:Aabcv2581M] Andhra Pradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

14. We find merit in the argument of the Ld. AR regarding the validity of the jurisdiction assumed by the Ld.AO for initiating proceedings under section 147 of the Act, i.e., without obtaining the approval of the specified authority under section 151(ii) of the Act and we find substance in the same. Admittedly, the reassessment proceedings under section

T.NAGI REDDY (HUF),,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blet. Nagireddy (Huf), Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, D.No. 17-40-23, Visakhapatnam. Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaaht 4815 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act. Accordingly, assessment was completed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act by determining total income of Rs. 46,12,130/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer has noted that the assessee had owned two piece of land along with his family members; one piece

ARIMILLI RAMA KRISHNA,WEST GODAVARI DIST vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

10 I.T.A.No.639/VIZ/2025 Arimilli Rama Krishna section 143(2) of the Act was mandatorily required to be issued by the AO within the time period prescribed under the statute for framing the reassessment? 14

UPPALAPADU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,UPPALAPADU, GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), GUNTUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan Sआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.523/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19) Uppalapadu Primary Vs. Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Cooperative Ward-2(1), Society Limited, Guntur. Uppalapadu, Guntur. Pan: Aaaau4669G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती Shri R. Siva Rama Krishna, "ारा/Assessee By: Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 29/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 31/10/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Society Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 25.01.2024 Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 Read With Sections 144 & 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”) Dated 25.01.2024 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. The 2 Uppalapadu Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society Limited Vs. Ito

10 Uppalapadu Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society Limited vs. ITO the proceedings under this section, irrespective of the fact that the provisions of section 148A have not been complied with.”. Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment 148. Before making the assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section 147, and subject to the provisions of section 148A, the Assessing Officer shall

POTHINA SATYANARAYANA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.568/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Pothina Satyanarayana, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-2(5), Pan: Ahdpp1312N Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 19/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 26/11/2025 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, Delhi, Dated 10/07/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”), Dated 12/02/2024 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. The 2 Pothina Satyanarayana Vs. Ito

14 Pothina Satyanarayana vs. ITO (c) consider the reply of assessee furnished, if any, in response to the showcause notice referred to in clause (b); (d) decide, on the basis of material available on record including reply of the assessee, whether or not it is a fit case to issue a notice under section 148, by passing an order, with

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)

10. The revenue being aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before us. Also, the assessee is before us as a Cross Objector. 11. Sri G.V.N. Hari, the learned Authorized Representative (for short “Ld.AR”) for the assessee at the threshold of hearing of the appeal, submitted that the A.O. had grossly erred

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

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.

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 culminating the assessment, initiated penalty proceedings, viz., (i) under section 270A of the Act for under- reporting of income, in consequence of misreporting of income, in respect of business income

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

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.

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 culminating the assessment, initiated penalty proceedings, viz., (i) under section 270A of the Act for under- reporting of income, in consequence of misreporting of income, in respect of business income