BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

43 results for “reassessment”+ TDSclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai767Delhi644Bangalore331Chennai313Hyderabad230Ahmedabad172Raipur155Jaipur142Kolkata136Chandigarh101Pune68Indore53Surat46Visakhapatnam43Cuttack38Patna28Agra24Rajkot22Cochin22Jodhpur21Lucknow21Guwahati19Nagpur19Karnataka19Amritsar14Dehradun13Panaji6Ranchi6Allahabad5Jabalpur3Varanasi2Gauhati1Telangana1SC1

Key Topics

Section 14850Section 14743Section 143(3)42Addition to Income33TDS30Section 26328Section 153A25Section 4025Reassessment20Section 148A

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

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

ITA 507/VIZ/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Apr 2018AY 2005-06

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

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasa Rao, DRFor Respondent: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 194CSection 263Section 40

TDS. Consequently the Assessing Officer has taken up the case for reassessment as per the direction of the order passed

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

Showing 1–20 of 43 · Page 1 of 3

17
Section 10(14)15
Disallowance12

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

ITA 45/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Harsha Haridasu, C.AFor Respondent: : Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 237Section 263

reassessment is meant to assess escaped income and cannot be used as an opportunity to claim fresh deduction or exemption. However, in the present case, there is no fresh claim of deduction or exemption. The assessee has merely claimed a refund of TDS

G.T.MOHAN RAO,,KAKINADA vs. THE ITO,, KAKINADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 182/VIZ/2015[]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Sept 2019

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.182/Viz/2015 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2007-08) G.T.Mohan Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Prop.Ramya Engineering Co. Ward-1 Plot No.3-20-4/1/A Kakinada Rammohan Nagar Kakinada [Pan : Aehpg7387R] (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 : 01.08.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2019 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Suman Malik, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194ISection 37(1)Section 40Section 40a

TDS on machinery hire charges for an amount of Rs.4,57,367/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The AO completed the reassessment

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

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 14/VIZ/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 May 2019AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Malik, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.V.N.Hari, AR
Section 10(14)Section 147Section 148Section 17(2)

TDS on the amounts as they are taxable. Since the above amounts are taxable, the AO reopened the assessments u/s 147 by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act and taken up the cases for reassessment

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

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 13/VIZ/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 May 2019AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Malik, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.V.N.Hari, AR
Section 10(14)Section 147Section 148Section 17(2)

TDS on the amounts as they are taxable. Since the above amounts are taxable, the AO reopened the assessments u/s 147 by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act and taken up the cases for reassessment

NUTHALAPATI RAVI SHANKAR,,PALACOLE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, PALACOLE

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 25/VIZ/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 May 2019AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Malik, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.V.N.Hari, AR
Section 10(14)Section 147Section 148Section 17(2)

TDS on the amounts as they are taxable. Since the above amounts are taxable, the AO reopened the assessments u/s 147 by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act and taken up the cases for reassessment

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 461/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Apr 2018AY 2008-2009

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

For Appellant: Shri R.Venkat Raman, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.S.N.Murthy, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194Section 194CSection 194C(3)(i)Section 263Section 3Section 40

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

NADIMPALLY VENKATA SANKAR RAMA KRISHNAM RAJU,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ITO,, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 322/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Apr 2018AY 2008-2009

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194HSection 263Section 40

reassessment u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act 1961 was completed on 31.03.2015 by determining the total income at Rs.6,82,016/-. The Ld.PCIT has taken up the case for revision u/s 263 and observed from the Profit & Loss A/c for the year under consideration that an amount of Rs.84,82,547/- was debited to the Profit & Loss

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 202/VIZ/2017[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2006-2007

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

reassessment to give effect to the order of the Ld.CIT(C) and called for the explanation of the assessee, who in turn stated that the entire packing material was purchased by the assessee with proper bills and vouchers and there was no contract. Further, the assessee also stated that Central Excise and VAT also was collected by the vendor

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 203/VIZ/2017[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2007-2008

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

reassessment to give effect to the order of the Ld.CIT(C) and called for the explanation of the assessee, who in turn stated that the entire packing material was purchased by the assessee with proper bills and vouchers and there was no contract. Further, the assessee also stated that Central Excise and VAT also was collected by the vendor

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 205/VIZ/2017[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2009-2010

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

reassessment to give effect to the order of the Ld.CIT(C) and called for the explanation of the assessee, who in turn stated that the entire packing material was purchased by the assessee with proper bills and vouchers and there was no contract. Further, the assessee also stated that Central Excise and VAT also was collected by the vendor

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 206/VIZ/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2010-2011

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

reassessment to give effect to the order of the Ld.CIT(C) and called for the explanation of the assessee, who in turn stated that the entire packing material was purchased by the assessee with proper bills and vouchers and there was no contract. Further, the assessee also stated that Central Excise and VAT also was collected by the vendor

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 201/VIZ/2017[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2005-2006

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

reassessment to give effect to the order of the Ld.CIT(C) and called for the explanation of the assessee, who in turn stated that the entire packing material was purchased by the assessee with proper bills and vouchers and there was no contract. Further, the assessee also stated that Central Excise and VAT also was collected by the vendor

KILARI VENKATA ROSAIAH,GUNTUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 608/VIZ/2018[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Jun 2020AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.608/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12) Kilari Venkata Rosaiah Vs Asst. Commissioner Of D.No.25-16-180 Income Tax G.T.Road, Amc Yard Circle-1(1) Guntur Guntur [Pan : Adspk7598L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri S.Ravi Shankar Narayan, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 16.03.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.06.2020

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.Ravi Shankar Narayan
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

reassessment proceedings in the hands of the assessee. The Ld.AR further submitted that on receipt of reply from the assessee, the AO dropped the proposed addition, but made the addition relating to short admission of capital gains. The assessee submitted that since the AO did not make any addition for which the reasons were recorded, the AO is not permitted

VENKATA RAMANA GODA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 489/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.489/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Venkata Ramana Goda, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Pan: Abzpg3216A Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Mrs. K. Hemalatha, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 17/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 06/08/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 08/03/2025. The 2 Venkata Ramana Goda Vs. Acit

For Appellant: Mrs. K. Hemalatha, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 2(14)(iii)Section 234ASection 234BSection 250

TDS) on the total amount of Rs. 1,11,20,502/- which was clearly mentioned in Form-26AS, and the credit of the said amount of tax deducted at source was claimed by the assessee in his return of income filed in response to notice under section 148 of the Act, therefore, the entire amount so credited/received from

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

ITA 386/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

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.

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69

TDS credit of Rs. 5,000/-). Against the aforesaid tax liability, the assessee had paid self-assessment tax of Rs. 84,676/- on 07/03/2020 and arrived at the balance tax liability of Rs. 2,89,080/-. Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi vs. ACIT 5. Thereafter, the assessee, in response to notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 30/03/2022, had filed

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

ITA 387/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

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.

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69

TDS credit of Rs. 5,000/-). Against the aforesaid tax liability, the assessee had paid self-assessment tax of Rs. 84,676/- on 07/03/2020 and arrived at the balance tax liability of Rs. 2,89,080/-. Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi vs. ACIT 5. Thereafter, the assessee, in response to notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 30/03/2022, had filed

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

ITA 385/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

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.

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69

TDS credit of Rs. 5,000/-). Against the aforesaid tax liability, the assessee had paid self-assessment tax of Rs. 84,676/- on 07/03/2020 and arrived at the balance tax liability of Rs. 2,89,080/-. Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi vs. ACIT 5. Thereafter, the assessee, in response to notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 30/03/2022, had filed

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ANUMOLU TIRUPATI RAYUDU(HUF),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 100/VIZ/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

TDS etc., and the assessee furnished the required details. 4. After verification of the books of accounts, the Ld. AO noted that during the year the assessee company availed a loan of Rs. 60 lakhs from M/s. Fulfil Vinmay Pvt Ltd, Kolkata and the assessee was asked to furnish the details of loan creditors and the confirmation letter in support

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ATR WAREHOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 103/VIZ/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

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

For Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

TDS etc., and the assessee furnished the required details. 4. After verification of the books of accounts, the Ld. AO noted that during the year the assessee company availed a loan of Rs. 60 lakhs from M/s. Fulfil Vinmay Pvt Ltd, Kolkata and the assessee was asked to furnish the details of loan creditors and the confirmation letter in support