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

section (1), shall stand revived with effect from the date of receipt of the order of such annulment by the Commissioner: Provided that such revival shall cease to have effect, if such order of annulment is set aside.]” 14. In the instant case, the AO had issued a notice u/s 153A for the six assessment years as provided

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

section (1), shall stand revived with effect from the date of receipt of the order of such annulment by the Commissioner: Provided that such revival shall cease to have effect, if such order of annulment is set aside.]” 14. In the instant case, the AO had issued a notice u/s 153A for the six assessment years as provided

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

section (1), shall stand revived with effect from the date of receipt of the order of such annulment by the Commissioner: Provided that such revival shall cease to have effect, if such order of annulment is set aside.]” 14. In the instant case, the AO had issued a notice u/s 153A for the six assessment years as provided

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

section (1), shall stand revived with effect from the date of receipt of the order of such annulment by the Commissioner: Provided that such revival shall cease to have effect, if such order of annulment is set aside.]” 14. In the instant case, the AO had issued a notice u/s 153A for the six assessment years as provided

SRI DHARIPALLI SAMPATH,, WRANGAL,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

section (1), shall stand revived with effect from the date of receipt of the order of such annulment by the Commissioner: Provided that such revival shall cease to have effect, if such order of annulment is set aside.]” 14. In the instant case, the AO had issued a notice u/s 153A for the six assessment years as provided

SRINIVASA RAO SIRIVURI PROPRIETOR,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VIZIANAGARAM

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

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

section 69A of the Act and determined the income at Rs.89,57,554/-. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but without success. 5. The assessee, aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. At the outset, it is noticed from the record that

GVA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

150\ntaxmann.com 18 (Karnataka), wherein it was held that "the assesseefailed to\nsubstantiate loss with no credible evidences before lower authorities thereby\nfailing to discharge primary onus lies on him to do so in respect of expenditure\nclaimed by him in the return of income, order of Tribunal deserved to be set\naside.\"\n17. The Ld. CIT(A) ought

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GVA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DHAMTARI

150\ntaxmann.com 18 (Karnataka), wherein it was held that "the assesseefailed to\nsubstantiate loss with no credible evidences before lower authorities thereby\nfailing to discharge primary onus lies on him to do so in respect of expenditure\nclaimed by him in the return of income, order of Tribunal deserved to be set\naside.\"\n17. The Ld. CIT(A) ought

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), VIJAYAWADA vs. SREELAKSHMI MUSUNURU, PENAMALURU

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.278/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sreelakshmi Musunuru, Ward-2(3), Penamaluru. Vijayawada. Pan: Aojpm4884K (Appellant) (Respondent)

150/- vide Document No. 2683/2013, initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Act. Notice under Section 148 of the Act, dated 31/03/2021 was issued to the assessee. CO. No. 08/Viz/2024 ITO vs. Sreelakshmi Musunuru 5. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the AO called upon the assessee to furnish the source of the investment made towards the purchase

DEVI SEA FOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

150/-. The Ld. AO made an addition of\nRs.48,56,000/- under section 14A of the Act.\n3. Ld.Pr.CIT under powers vested in him as per provisions of section 263 of\nthe Act examined the assessment records and noticed that assessee has debited\nan amount of Rs.15,17,22,510/- towards “Fair value loss on derivative\ninstruments\" which

THE DEPUTY. CIT,, VIJAYAWADA vs. M/S. EFFTRONICS SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

reassessment by disallowing the claim made by the assessee u/s 35(2AB) of I.T. Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) held that reopening of assessment is bad in law and accordingly allowed the appeal of the assessee. ITA Nos.61, 62 & 63/Vizag/2017

THE DEPUTY. CIT,, VIJAYAWADA vs. M/S. EFFTRONICS SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

reassessment by disallowing the claim made by the assessee u/s 35(2AB) of I.T. Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) held that reopening of assessment is bad in law and accordingly allowed the appeal of the assessee. ITA Nos.61, 62 & 63/Vizag/2017

THE DEPUTY. CIT,, VIJAYAWADA vs. M/S. EFFTRONICS SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

reassessment by disallowing the claim made by the assessee u/s 35(2AB) of I.T. Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) held that reopening of assessment is bad in law and accordingly allowed the appeal of the assessee. ITA Nos.61, 62 & 63/Vizag/2017

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), VIJAYAWADA vs. EFFTRONICS SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED., VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

reassessment by disallowing the claim made by the assessee u/s 35(2AB) of I.T. Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) held that reopening of assessment is bad in law and accordingly allowed the appeal of the assessee. ITA Nos.61, 62 & 63/Vizag/2017

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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:

150/- made by the Assessing Officer U/s. 69 of the Act towards alleged 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

KUMAR PAPPU SINGH,TANUKU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, , ELURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.270/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-2014) Sri Kumar Pappu Singh Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.23-3-26, Sundaram Nagar Income Tax, Sajjapuram Circle-1, Kks Towers, Tanuku Rr Pet, Eluru [Pan : Aeepp2496P] Andhra Pradesh (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

150 shares. Hence argued that the entire allotment of shares should not be considered for computing the income under income from other sources. The Ld. AR submitted that the Ld.Pr. CIT considered the fair market value before allotment without comparing the value of each share at the time of allotment held by the assessee. Since the assessee is a shareholder

IRRI SURYA PRAKASH RAO,NIDADAVOLE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, TANUKU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.358/Viz/2019 (ननधधारणवर्ा/Assessment Year:2009-10) Irri Surya Prakash Rao Vs Income Tax Officer S/O Veerraju Ward-2, Tanuku Jaggery Merchant Nidadavole [Pan : Aaepi2478N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Smt Suman Malik, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.06.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri D.S.Sunder Singh: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)]-11, Hyderabad In Appeal No.213/2017-18/Cit(A)-11/Hyd Dated 28.02.2019 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10. 2

section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘Act’] by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act. The reassessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 by an order dated 17.08.2015 on total income of Rs.14,36,430/-. In the reassessment order, the Assessing Officer (AO) made the additions relating to payments made to lorries

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

section 80IB(10). Therefore, case was reopened u/sec.147 by issuing notice u/sec.148 on 04/11/2011 and called ITA Nos. 108 & 109/VIZ/2019 (Abhilash Synergetic Constructions & Exports Pvt. Ltd.) for explanation of the assessee as to why the deduction claimed u/sec. 80IB should not be disallowed. The assessee filed explanation objecting for reopening of assessment stating the project was completed within four years