VEERA VENKATA RAMAKRISHNA MOHAN RAO KODURI,EAST GODHAVARI vs. ACIT, CIRLCE - 1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआईटीए. नं. / Ita Nos. 290 & 291/Viz/2025 निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years:2018-19 & 2019-20) Veera Venkata Ramakrishna V. Acit – Circle – 1 Mohana Rao Koduri Ayakkar Bhawan Flat No. 201, Sri Towers Nh-16 Veerabadhrapuram Venkateswara Nagar Rajahmundry – 533105 Syamalanagar Andhra Pradesh East Godavari District - 533103 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Afrpk0888C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आईटीए. नं. / Ita Nos. 293 & 294/Viz/2025 निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years:2018-19 & 2019-20) Satya Venkata Krishna Ravi V. Acit – Circle – 1 Prasad Koduri Ayakkar Bhawan 81-10-3/6, Venkateswaranagar Veerabadhrapuram Near Ima Halla, Danavaipeta Rajahmundry – 533105 East Godavari District Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Afrpk0889D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Smt Hemalatha K, Ca राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit(Dr)

reassessed or recomputed in a preceding order” 10. She also reiterated in her written submissions the various scenario under which the penalty under section 270A leviable, which is reproduced below: - Scenarios Applicability for assessee’s case a. when the assessed income is Not Applicable since there is no greater than the returned income; difference between assessed income and (refer 270A

VEERA VENKATA RAMAKRISHNA MOHANA RAO KODURI,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआईटीए. नं. / Ita Nos. 290 & 291/Viz/2025 निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years:2018-19 & 2019-20) Veera Venkata Ramakrishna V. Acit – Circle – 1 Mohana Rao Koduri Ayakkar Bhawan Flat No. 201, Sri Towers Nh-16 Veerabadhrapuram Venkateswara Nagar Rajahmundry – 533105 Syamalanagar Andhra Pradesh East Godavari District - 533103 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Afrpk0888C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आईटीए. नं. / Ita Nos. 293 & 294/Viz/2025 निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years:2018-19 & 2019-20) Satya Venkata Krishna Ravi V. Acit – Circle – 1 Prasad Koduri Ayakkar Bhawan 81-10-3/6, Venkateswaranagar Veerabadhrapuram Near Ima Halla, Danavaipeta Rajahmundry – 533105 East Godavari District Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Afrpk0889D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Smt Hemalatha K, Ca राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit(Dr)

reassessed or recomputed in a preceding order” 10. She also reiterated in her written submissions the various scenario under which the penalty under section 270A leviable, which is reproduced below: - Scenarios Applicability for assessee’s case a. when the assessed income is Not Applicable since there is no greater than the returned income; difference between assessed income and (refer 270A

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

reassessed or recomputed in a\npreceding order”\n10.\nShe also reiterated in her written submissions the various scenario under\nwhich the penalty under section 270A leviable, which is reproduced below: -\na.\nScenarios\nwhen the assessed income is\ngreater than the returned income;\n(refer 270A(2))\nb.\nwhere return was filed and\nassessed income is more than\nincome

MOTHER THERESSA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,AMALAPURAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

reassessed has the effect of reducing the loss or converting such loss into income.” Page No. 6 I.T.A. Nos. 163&229/VIZ/2024 C.O. No. 01/VIZ/2024 Mother Theressa Educational Society 8. He argued that the assessee does not fulfill any of the conditions and hence there is no under-reporting of any income. Further, he also referred to Sub-section

ACIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. MOTHER THERESSA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, CHAITANYANAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

reassessed has the effect of reducing the loss or converting such loss into income.” Page No. 6 I.T.A. Nos. 163&229/VIZ/2024 C.O. No. 01/VIZ/2024 Mother Theressa Educational Society 8. He argued that the assessee does not fulfill any of the conditions and hence there is no under-reporting of any income. Further, he also referred to Sub-section

THE YANAM CO OPERATIVE STORES LIMITED,YANAM vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section 263 of the Act, relying on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd. (1992) 198 ITR 297 (SC) stating that, since the assessee did not file any ROI u/s.139 of the Act, the reassessment

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

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

reassessment there is no such option with the assessing officer once the notice under section 148 has been issued. This notice itself means that the case will be assessed under scrutiny. Therefore there is no requirement of issuance of notice under section 143(2) in such cases. The fact that such a notice was issued

KOTI NARASIMHA REDDY GUTTIKONDA,GUNTUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.332/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2016-17) Koti Narasimha Reddy Guttikonda Vs. Pr. Cit 1-99, Rudravaram – 522410 Siddhardha Public School Road Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh Mogalrajapurm Vijayawada – 520010 [Pan: Amcpg7882N] Andhra Pradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri K.Siva Ram Kumar, Ca राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

reassessment couldn't have been initiated as per Sec.149, but still the assessee paid taxes. 5. The appellant craves leave to add or amend any Ground of Appeal.” 5. Assessee has challenged the notice issued under section 148 of the Act and has claimed immunity as per Explanation 4C to section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Ld.AR submitted that

THE ARYAPURAM CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.,,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE CIT,, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

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

section 263 of the Act. In this case, the assessing officer passed an order u/s 143(3) of the Act on 31.12.2009. If at all, the Ld.Commissioner wanted to exercise power u/s 263 of the Act, he has to issue a notice on or before 31.12.2011. In this case, he has issued notice on 04.03.2013 and the order was passed

THE ARYAPURAM CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ACIT,, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

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

section 263 of the Act. In this case, the assessing officer passed an order u/s 143(3) of the Act on 31.12.2009. If at all, the Ld.Commissioner wanted to exercise power u/s 263 of the Act, he has to issue a notice on or before 31.12.2011. In this case, he has issued notice on 04.03.2013 and the order was passed

ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LIMITED,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1), , VIJAYAWADA

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.167/Viz/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2012-13) Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Corporation Ltd. Income Tax Vijayawada Circle-3(1) [Pan : Aacca2734J] Vijayawada (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

reassessment proceedings, the period of limitation provided for under sub-section (2) of section 263 of the Act would begin

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)

section 56(2)(vii)(c) of the Act, accordingly, we set aside the order of the Pr.CIT and allow the appeal of the assessee. 16. The next contention of the assessee is that the revision proceedings u/s 263 are taken on the basis of audit objection and the same are not permissible on the basis of audit objection. In this

SRINIVASA RAO ARNEPALLI,KRISHNA DIST vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VIJAYAWADA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.153/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Srinivasa Rao Arnepalli Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Bhavishya Edible Oil Refinery Income Tax 140/1, Kodurupadu Vijayawada Bapulapadu Mandalam Krishna Dist. [Pan : Aftpa9285K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

section 263 of the Act is not in accordance with law. 9. Without prejudice to each of the above grounds raised by the assessee, the Ld. Pr.CIT is erred in not providing proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee which is against the principles of natural justice. 4. The only contention of the assessee is that the assessee filed

SRI NAGESH ANUMALISETTY,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE PR. CIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

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

Reassessment u/s 153A is possible in unabated assessments only with the incriminating material found during the course of search. If no new material is unearthed during the course of search revision u/s 263 is not permissible in the case of completed assessments on the basis of entries made in the regular boos of accounts. For any omission or commission resulting

SRI MAHESH ANUMALISETTY,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE PR. CIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

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

Reassessment u/s 153A is possible in unabated assessments only with the incriminating material found during the course of search. If no new material is unearthed during the course of search revision u/s 263 is not permissible in the case of completed assessments on the basis of entries made in the regular boos of accounts. For any omission or commission resulting

MUTHAVARAPU SRINIVASA BABU,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), VIJAYAWADA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआईटीए. नं. / Ita No. 465/Viz/2024 (A.Y. 2012-13) Muthavarapu Srinivasa Babu V. Asst. Cit – Circle – 2(1) C/O. Ca M.V. Prasad Cr Buildings, 1St Floor Annex D.No. 60-7-13, Ground Floor M.G. Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Siddhartha Nagar, 4Th Lane Andhra Pradesh Vijaywada-520010 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Abwpm3798A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Mv Prasad, Ca राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

section 263 dated 28.03.2017 set aside the order of the Ld.AO and directed to Ld.AO to re-do the assessment. Accordingly, in the Page No. 3 Muthavarapu Srinivasa Babu reassessment

DY CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. CONZUG LOGISTICS PVT. LTD.,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and

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

reassessment as per the direction of the order passed under section 263 of the act and given effect to the revision

GHANSHYAM SHARMA,,RAJASTHAN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.461/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वषा/Assessment Year:2008-09) Ghanshyam Sharma Vs. The Principal Commissioner Jakhal Vill & Post Of Income Tax-1 Jhunjhunu District Visakhapatnam Rajasthan – 333 305 [Pan :Abups5701R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R.Venkat Raman, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri T.S.N.Murthy, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 12.04.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.04.2018

reassessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 23.03.2015 by making the addition of Rs.1,44,139/-. The Ld. Pr.CIT has taken up the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s.147 dated 23.03.2015 for revision u/s 263 and observed that the assessee made the contract payments/credited amounts in excess of Rs.50000/- in aggregate to a single party / single lorry and attract