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:

reassessment proceedings initiated vide notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 29.06.2021, had culminated into the assessment order passed by the A.O under Section 147 of the Act, dated 23.03.2023, therefore, it is the order passed by the Vedumutha Electricals India Private Limited. CIT(A), dated 29.11.2024 in Appeal No. CIT(A)-48, Mumbai /10553/2016-17 which alone for the subject

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:

reassessment proceedings initiated vide notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 29.06.2021, had culminated into the assessment order passed by the A.O under Section 147 of the Act, dated 23.03.2023, therefore, it is the order passed by the Vedumutha Electricals India Private Limited. CIT(A), dated 29.11.2024 in Appeal No. CIT(A)-48, Mumbai /10553/2016-17 which alone for the subject

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:

reassessment proceedings initiated vide notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 29.06.2021, had culminated into the assessment order passed by the A.O under Section 147 of the Act, dated 23.03.2023, therefore, it is the order passed by the Vedumutha Electricals India Private Limited. CIT(A), dated 29.11.2024 in Appeal No. CIT(A)-48, Mumbai /10553/2016-17 which alone for the subject

RAGHURAM HUME PIPES PRIVATE LIMITED,GUNTUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), GUNTUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shrik Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./ I.T.A.233/Viz/2024 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2016-17) Raghuram Hume Pipes Private Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Guntur-522002. Income Tax, Pan: Aaccr6125N Circle-2(1), Guntur. (अपीलधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

133A of the Act was conducted in this case on 25/03/2019 and subsequently, initiated proceedings U/s. 147 of the Act. In response to the notice U/s. 148 of the Act issued on 30/03/2019, the assessee filed the return of income on 28/12/2019 admitting a total income of Rs. 4,03,16,660/-. Subsequently, notices U/s

BADETI VENKATESWARA RAO,ATTILI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , RAJAHMUNDRY

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.356/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Badeti Venkateswara Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.17-44, Poleramma Temple St., Ward-1 Attili, West Godavari Dist. Tanuku [Pan : Azzpb8511H]

133A and recorded the statements during the course of survey and found the discrepancies at the time of survey. All the above discrepancies were found by the AO at the time of survey and because of the discrepancies found during the course of survey, the assessment was reopened u/s 147 to examine the material available at the time of survey

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

133A in the cases of the alleged\nsuppliers, the fact of availing accommodation entries by the assessee company\nin the guise of purchases, would not have come to light and the modus\noperandi of the assessee company would not have beenunearthed.\n10.\nReliance is placed on the recent decision of Hon'ble High Court of\nBombay in the case

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

133A in the cases of the alleged\nsuppliers, the fact of availing accommodation entries by the assessee company\nin the guise of purchases, would not have come to light and the modus\noperandi of the assessee company would not have beenunearthed.\n10.\nReliance is placed on the recent decision of Hon'ble High Court of\nBombay in the case

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, GUNTUR vs. PARUCHURU SATISH KUMAR(HUF), GUNTUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

Survey proceedings U/s 133A were conducted on the Business premises of the Assessee. Then initiation of action i.e. u/s 148 for the Asst Year 2017-18 is against the law and more specifically no information in the form of material was found during search proceedings conducted on the sister concerns of the Assessee. On the legality of the statement recorded

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , GUNTUR vs. PARUCHURU SATISH KUMAR(HUF), GUNTUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

Survey proceedings U/s 133A were conducted on the Business premises of the Assessee. Then initiation of action i.e. u/s 148 for the Asst Year 2017-18 is against the law and more specifically no information in the form of material was found during search proceedings conducted on the sister concerns of the Assessee. On the legality of the statement recorded

SMT. L SUDHA BALA, L/R OF LATE SRI L.NARSA REDDY,GUNTUR vs. THE DCIT, SPECIAL RANGE GUNTUR, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.260 & 261/Viz/2012 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years :1984-85 & 1985-86 Respectively) L.Sudha Bala Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of L/R Of Late Sri L Narasa Reddy Income Tax Prop.Sri Venkateswara Agro Chemicals Special Range Industries Guntur 2-14-101, Syamala Nagar 2Nd Lane, Guntur [Pan : Acgpl2351P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

reassessment proceedings were initiated. Ld.A.R. accordingly argued that the assessment made u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) and the additions made on account of bogus purchases and the disallowance u/s 40A(3) in the assessment made u/s 143(3) required to be deleted. The Ld.AR also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of A.P. and Telangana

SMT. L SUDHA BALA, L/R OF LATE SRI L.NARSA REDDY,GUNTUR vs. THE DCIT, SPECIAL RANGE GUNTUR, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.260 & 261/Viz/2012 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years :1984-85 & 1985-86 Respectively) L.Sudha Bala Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of L/R Of Late Sri L Narasa Reddy Income Tax Prop.Sri Venkateswara Agro Chemicals Special Range Industries Guntur 2-14-101, Syamala Nagar 2Nd Lane, Guntur [Pan : Acgpl2351P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

reassessment proceedings were initiated. Ld.A.R. accordingly argued that the assessment made u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) and the additions made on account of bogus purchases and the disallowance u/s 40A(3) in the assessment made u/s 143(3) required to be deleted. The Ld.AR also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of A.P. and Telangana

TADISETTI MURALI MOHAN,GUNTUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

survey operation U/s. 133A of the Act. The case was selected for complete scrutiny and the assessment was completed U/s. 143(3) on 27/3/2015 determining the total income at Rs. 8,11,90,000/-. Subsequently, on verification of balance sheet for the AY 2012-13 and AY 2011-12, the Ld. AO found that there is an increase

TADISETTI MURALI MOHAN,GUNTUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

survey operation U/s. 133A of the Act. The case was selected for complete scrutiny and the assessment was completed U/s. 143(3) on 27/3/2015 determining the total income at Rs. 8,11,90,000/-. Subsequently, on verification of balance sheet for the AY 2012-13 and AY 2011-12, the Ld. AO found that there is an increase

TADISETTI MURALI MOHAN,GUNTUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

survey operation U/s. 133A of the Act. The case was selected for complete scrutiny and the assessment was completed U/s. 143(3) on 27/3/2015 determining the total income at Rs. 8,11,90,000/-. Subsequently, on verification of balance sheet for the AY 2012-13 and AY 2011-12, the Ld. AO found that there is an increase

TADISETTI MURALI MOHAN,GUNTUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

survey operation U/s. 133A of the Act. The case was selected for complete scrutiny and the assessment was completed U/s. 143(3) on 27/3/2015 determining the total income at Rs. 8,11,90,000/-. Subsequently, on verification of balance sheet for the AY 2012-13 and AY 2011-12, the Ld. AO found that there is an increase

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. POTLURI PHANENDRS BABU , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.491/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2012-2013) Income Tax Officer Vs. Sri Potluri Phanendra Babu Ward – 3(2) 1St Floor, Infinity Towers, Visakhapatnam Sankara Matham Road Visakhapatnam [Pan : Agspp7638K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.132/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.491/Viz/2019) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2012-2013) Sri Potluri Phanendra Babu Vs. Income Tax Officer 1St Floor, Infinity Towers, Ward – 3(2) Sankara Matham Road Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Agspp7638K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

survey u/s 133A of the Act and all the investments made by the appellant have been duly considered for the purpose of reassessment

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)

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 149 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, has escaped assessment for any assessment year, the Assessing

NANDIGAM VEERABRAHMAM,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), RAJAHMUNDRY

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

Bench: Us:

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, has escaped assessment for any assessment year, the Assessing