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

51,23,204/- after making certain additions, viz., (i) addition under the head capital gains: Rs.4,48,23,073/-; (ii) addition under the head profit and gains from business or profession: Rs.2,37,686/-; and (iii) interest income: Rs.62,445/-. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) who partly allowed the same. Ostensibly

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INFINITY TOWERS, SANKARMATHAM ROAD vs. AMMAJI CHENNUPATI, RAJEEVNAGAR, KURMANNAPALEM

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed, while the additional ground of cross-objection of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Us:

51,500/-. 6. The A.O., based on the aforesaid information, issued Notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 16.04.2021 (as per the pre-amended law). Thereafter, in view of the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of UOI Vs. Ashish Agarwal and CBDT Instruction No. 01/2022 dated 11.05.2022, the A.O. treated the Notice

BHARGAV RAM MUNAGAPATI,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

51,300/-. 3. On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Before Ld. CIT(A), assessee has raised various grounds challenging the assessment order. After considering the submissions of the assessee, Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Being aggrieved by the order

MANASA ASSOCIATS,,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ITO, WARD - 3,, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.89/Viz/2014 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2006-07) Manasa Associates Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.79-18-25 Ward-3 Omkar Street Rajahmundry Rajahmundry [Pan : Aanfm7178G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri K.C.Das, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 18.07.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2018

reassessment proceedings, the AO made the addition of Rs.25,51,204/- representing the difference between the sale value of 9 flats amounting to Rs.43,60,000 and the structure value of 9 flats i.e Rs.31,41,950 and the value of unsold flats amounting to Rs.12,97,824/- aggregating to Rs.25,50,874/- and completed the assessment. 5. Aggrieved

SUDHARANI SURISETTY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.166/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Sudharani Surisetty V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 1 29-2-34, Opposite Judge Court Flat No. 401, 4Th Floor Main, Dabagardens Prathyakshar Bhawan Prakasharaopeta Mvp Double Road Visakhapatnam – 530020 Visakhapatnam – 530020 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Cnbps4046N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparnavilluri, Sr.Ar

51,64,300/- in a saving bank account. Corporate Centre Thereafter, Ld. Assessing Officer [hereinafter in short “Ld. AO"] issued show-cause notice under section 148A(b) of the Act. In response, assessee furnished its reply and submitted that assessee is carrying out the activity of purchase and sale of vegetable & coconuts during the F.Y. 2014-15 and also derives

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon'Ble**

51,64,880/- | 5. Thereafter, Ld. Assessing Officer [hereinafter in short "Ld.AO"] issued notice under section 148 of the Act on 04.04.2022. In response, assessee filed its return of income on 17.06.2022 and claimed deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act of Rs.5,21,381/-. Subsequently, statutory notices under section

BHAVANASI YELLA RAO vs. THE ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.265, 266, 267 & 268/Vizag/2017 (धनधाारण िर्ा / Assessment Years: (2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Bhavanasi Yella Rao Acit, Central Circle Guntur Vijayawada [Pan No.Acjpb0307J] (अपीलाथी / Appellant) (प्रत्याथी / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.351/Vizag/2017 (धनधाारण िर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit, Central Circle Bhavanasi Yella Rao Vijayawada Guntur (अपीलाथी / Appellant) (प्रत्याथी / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G.V.N. Hari, Ar प्रत्याथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Debakumar Sonowal, Dr सुनिाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09.01.2018 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2018

reassessment". When a return is filed and when neither an acknowledgement or intimation u/s.143(1)of the Act is issued nor a notice u/s.143(2) of the Act is issued within the time limit laid down in the proviso to Secc.143(2) of the Act, the proceedings initiated by filing the return are closed. In the present case, the period

BHAVANASI YELLA RAO vs. THE ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.265, 266, 267 & 268/Vizag/2017 (धनधाारण िर्ा / Assessment Years: (2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Bhavanasi Yella Rao Acit, Central Circle Guntur Vijayawada [Pan No.Acjpb0307J] (अपीलाथी / Appellant) (प्रत्याथी / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.351/Vizag/2017 (धनधाारण िर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit, Central Circle Bhavanasi Yella Rao Vijayawada Guntur (अपीलाथी / Appellant) (प्रत्याथी / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G.V.N. Hari, Ar प्रत्याथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Debakumar Sonowal, Dr सुनिाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09.01.2018 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2018

reassessment". When a return is filed and when neither an acknowledgement or intimation u/s.143(1)of the Act is issued nor a notice u/s.143(2) of the Act is issued within the time limit laid down in the proviso to Secc.143(2) of the Act, the proceedings initiated by filing the return are closed. In the present case, the period

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI BHAVANSI YELLA RAO, PIDUGURALLA

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.265, 266, 267 & 268/Vizag/2017 (धनधाारण िर्ा / Assessment Years: (2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Bhavanasi Yella Rao Acit, Central Circle Guntur Vijayawada [Pan No.Acjpb0307J] (अपीलाथी / Appellant) (प्रत्याथी / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.351/Vizag/2017 (धनधाारण िर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit, Central Circle Bhavanasi Yella Rao Vijayawada Guntur (अपीलाथी / Appellant) (प्रत्याथी / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G.V.N. Hari, Ar प्रत्याथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Debakumar Sonowal, Dr सुनिाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09.01.2018 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2018

reassessment". When a return is filed and when neither an acknowledgement or intimation u/s.143(1)of the Act is issued nor a notice u/s.143(2) of the Act is issued within the time limit laid down in the proviso to Secc.143(2) of the Act, the proceedings initiated by filing the return are closed. In the present case, the period

BHAVANASI YELLA RAO vs. THE ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.265, 266, 267 & 268/Vizag/2017 (धनधाारण िर्ा / Assessment Years: (2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Bhavanasi Yella Rao Acit, Central Circle Guntur Vijayawada [Pan No.Acjpb0307J] (अपीलाथी / Appellant) (प्रत्याथी / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.351/Vizag/2017 (धनधाारण िर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit, Central Circle Bhavanasi Yella Rao Vijayawada Guntur (अपीलाथी / Appellant) (प्रत्याथी / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G.V.N. Hari, Ar प्रत्याथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Debakumar Sonowal, Dr सुनिाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09.01.2018 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2018

reassessment". When a return is filed and when neither an acknowledgement or intimation u/s.143(1)of the Act is issued nor a notice u/s.143(2) of the Act is issued within the time limit laid down in the proviso to Secc.143(2) of the Act, the proceedings initiated by filing the return are closed. In the present case, the period

BHAVANASI YELLA RAO vs. THE ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.265, 266, 267 & 268/Vizag/2017 (धनधाारण िर्ा / Assessment Years: (2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Bhavanasi Yella Rao Acit, Central Circle Guntur Vijayawada [Pan No.Acjpb0307J] (अपीलाथी / Appellant) (प्रत्याथी / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.351/Vizag/2017 (धनधाारण िर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit, Central Circle Bhavanasi Yella Rao Vijayawada Guntur (अपीलाथी / Appellant) (प्रत्याथी / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G.V.N. Hari, Ar प्रत्याथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Debakumar Sonowal, Dr सुनिाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09.01.2018 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2018

reassessment". When a return is filed and when neither an acknowledgement or intimation u/s.143(1)of the Act is issued nor a notice u/s.143(2) of the Act is issued within the time limit laid down in the proviso to Secc.143(2) of the Act, the proceedings initiated by filing the return are closed. In the present case, the period

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

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

51,73,613 2008-09 3,82,99,530 5,83,09,459 2009-10 4,85,01,045 7,48,30,872 2010-11 9,49,98,660 25,06,85,958 Subsequent to the completion of assessments, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the appeals partly. Against the order

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

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

51,73,613 2008-09 3,82,99,530 5,83,09,459 2009-10 4,85,01,045 7,48,30,872 2010-11 9,49,98,660 25,06,85,958 Subsequent to the completion of assessments, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the appeals partly. Against the order

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

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

51,73,613 2008-09 3,82,99,530 5,83,09,459 2009-10 4,85,01,045 7,48,30,872 2010-11 9,49,98,660 25,06,85,958 Subsequent to the completion of assessments, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the appeals partly. Against the order

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

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

51,73,613 2008-09 3,82,99,530 5,83,09,459 2009-10 4,85,01,045 7,48,30,872 2010-11 9,49,98,660 25,06,85,958 Subsequent to the completion of assessments, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the appeals partly. Against the order

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

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

51,73,613 2008-09 3,82,99,530 5,83,09,459 2009-10 4,85,01,045 7,48,30,872 2010-11 9,49,98,660 25,06,85,958 Subsequent to the completion of assessments, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the appeals partly. Against the order

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

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

51,73,613 2008-09 3,82,99,530 5,83,09,459 2009-10 4,85,01,045 7,48,30,872 2010-11 9,49,98,660 25,06,85,958 Subsequent to the completion of assessments, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the appeals partly. Against the order

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVEL,PROP: BHARATHI SOAP WORKS, 1ST LANE,,GUNTUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

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

51,73,613 2008-09 3,82,99,530 5,83,09,459 2009-10 4,85,01,045 7,48,30,872 2010-11 9,49,98,660 25,06,85,958 Subsequent to the completion of assessments, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the appeals partly. Against the order

MYNENI VENKATA RAO,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

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

51,73,613 2008-09 3,82,99,530 5,83,09,459 2009-10 4,85,01,045 7,48,30,872 2010-11 9,49,98,660 25,06,85,958 Subsequent to the completion of assessments, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the appeals partly. Against the order