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.

30 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Revision u/s 263clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai362Delhi316Bangalore167Kolkata152Chennai146Jaipur144Ahmedabad86Pune82Chandigarh72Raipur54Hyderabad53Indore52Cochin34Visakhapatnam30Rajkot24Cuttack22Allahabad21Nagpur18Amritsar16Surat15Agra10Lucknow9Karnataka9Jodhpur9Dehradun7Jabalpur7Patna5Guwahati4Ranchi3Calcutta3Varanasi3Himachal Pradesh2SC2Uttarakhand1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)78Section 26347Section 14825Section 153A24Addition to Income18Section 13216Section 153C14Section 80I13Revision u/s 263

G. VENKATA KRISHNA,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE ITO,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the assessees for the Assessment Years 2010-

ITA 31/VIZ/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Aug 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.31& 33/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11 & 2011-12) G.Venkata Krishna Vs. Income Tax Officer Prop.Ghantasala Manikyala Rao Cards Ward-1 11-25-167, Main Road, One Town Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan :Acppg1246F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.32/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11) G.Venkata Raman Income Tax Officer Partner.Sri Dhanalakshmi Ward-1(1) Stationery Mart Vijayawada 11-54-225, Jai Hind Market Main Road, One Town, Vijayawada [Pan :Acppg1245G] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.34 & 35/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11 & 2011-12) M/S Sri Vijayalakshmi Stationery & Income Tax Officer Fancy Mart, D.No.11-25-167 Ward-1(1) Main Road, Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan :Aaifs1693M] निर्धाऩिती की ओि से/ Assessee By : Shri C.Subramanyam, Ar िधजस्व की ओि से/ Revenue By : Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, Dr सुिवधई की तधिीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2018 घोषणध की तधिीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.08.2018

For Appellant: Shri C.Subramanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148

reassessment proceedings and after complete satisfaction regarding the sources for repayment, the assessment was completed. Hence, there is no error in the assessment order framed by the AO. Thus, there is no case for revision u/s 263. (iii) The 3rd issue raised by the Ld.Pr.CIT was with regard to mismatch of dates for payment of consideration for purchase

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2

13
Section 133A10
Disallowance10
Survey u/s 133A9

M/S. SRI VIJAYALAKSHMI STATIONERY & FANCY MART,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE ITO,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the assessees for the Assessment Years 2010-

ITA 35/VIZ/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Aug 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.31& 33/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11 & 2011-12) G.Venkata Krishna Vs. Income Tax Officer Prop.Ghantasala Manikyala Rao Cards Ward-1 11-25-167, Main Road, One Town Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan :Acppg1246F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.32/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11) G.Venkata Raman Income Tax Officer Partner.Sri Dhanalakshmi Ward-1(1) Stationery Mart Vijayawada 11-54-225, Jai Hind Market Main Road, One Town, Vijayawada [Pan :Acppg1245G] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.34 & 35/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11 & 2011-12) M/S Sri Vijayalakshmi Stationery & Income Tax Officer Fancy Mart, D.No.11-25-167 Ward-1(1) Main Road, Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan :Aaifs1693M] निर्धाऩिती की ओि से/ Assessee By : Shri C.Subramanyam, Ar िधजस्व की ओि से/ Revenue By : Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, Dr सुिवधई की तधिीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2018 घोषणध की तधिीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.08.2018

For Appellant: Shri C.Subramanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148

reassessment proceedings and after complete satisfaction regarding the sources for repayment, the assessment was completed. Hence, there is no error in the assessment order framed by the AO. Thus, there is no case for revision u/s 263. (iii) The 3rd issue raised by the Ld.Pr.CIT was with regard to mismatch of dates for payment of consideration for purchase

G. VENKATA KRISHNA,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE ITO,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the assessees for the Assessment Years 2010-

ITA 33/VIZ/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Aug 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.31& 33/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11 & 2011-12) G.Venkata Krishna Vs. Income Tax Officer Prop.Ghantasala Manikyala Rao Cards Ward-1 11-25-167, Main Road, One Town Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan :Acppg1246F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.32/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11) G.Venkata Raman Income Tax Officer Partner.Sri Dhanalakshmi Ward-1(1) Stationery Mart Vijayawada 11-54-225, Jai Hind Market Main Road, One Town, Vijayawada [Pan :Acppg1245G] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.34 & 35/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11 & 2011-12) M/S Sri Vijayalakshmi Stationery & Income Tax Officer Fancy Mart, D.No.11-25-167 Ward-1(1) Main Road, Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan :Aaifs1693M] निर्धाऩिती की ओि से/ Assessee By : Shri C.Subramanyam, Ar िधजस्व की ओि से/ Revenue By : Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, Dr सुिवधई की तधिीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2018 घोषणध की तधिीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.08.2018

For Appellant: Shri C.Subramanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148

reassessment proceedings and after complete satisfaction regarding the sources for repayment, the assessment was completed. Hence, there is no error in the assessment order framed by the AO. Thus, there is no case for revision u/s 263. (iii) The 3rd issue raised by the Ld.Pr.CIT was with regard to mismatch of dates for payment of consideration for purchase

M/S. SRI VIJAYALAKSHMI STATIONERY & FANCY MART,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE ITO,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the assessees for the Assessment Years 2010-

ITA 34/VIZ/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Aug 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.31& 33/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11 & 2011-12) G.Venkata Krishna Vs. Income Tax Officer Prop.Ghantasala Manikyala Rao Cards Ward-1 11-25-167, Main Road, One Town Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan :Acppg1246F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.32/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11) G.Venkata Raman Income Tax Officer Partner.Sri Dhanalakshmi Ward-1(1) Stationery Mart Vijayawada 11-54-225, Jai Hind Market Main Road, One Town, Vijayawada [Pan :Acppg1245G] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.34 & 35/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11 & 2011-12) M/S Sri Vijayalakshmi Stationery & Income Tax Officer Fancy Mart, D.No.11-25-167 Ward-1(1) Main Road, Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan :Aaifs1693M] निर्धाऩिती की ओि से/ Assessee By : Shri C.Subramanyam, Ar िधजस्व की ओि से/ Revenue By : Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, Dr सुिवधई की तधिीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2018 घोषणध की तधिीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.08.2018

For Appellant: Shri C.Subramanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148

reassessment proceedings and after complete satisfaction regarding the sources for repayment, the assessment was completed. Hence, there is no error in the assessment order framed by the AO. Thus, there is no case for revision u/s 263. (iii) The 3rd issue raised by the Ld.Pr.CIT was with regard to mismatch of dates for payment of consideration for purchase

G. VENKATA KRISHNA,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE ITO,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the assessees for the Assessment Years 2010-

ITA 32/VIZ/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Aug 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.31& 33/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11 & 2011-12) G.Venkata Krishna Vs. Income Tax Officer Prop.Ghantasala Manikyala Rao Cards Ward-1 11-25-167, Main Road, One Town Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan :Acppg1246F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.32/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11) G.Venkata Raman Income Tax Officer Partner.Sri Dhanalakshmi Ward-1(1) Stationery Mart Vijayawada 11-54-225, Jai Hind Market Main Road, One Town, Vijayawada [Pan :Acppg1245G] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.34 & 35/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11 & 2011-12) M/S Sri Vijayalakshmi Stationery & Income Tax Officer Fancy Mart, D.No.11-25-167 Ward-1(1) Main Road, Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan :Aaifs1693M] निर्धाऩिती की ओि से/ Assessee By : Shri C.Subramanyam, Ar िधजस्व की ओि से/ Revenue By : Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, Dr सुिवधई की तधिीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2018 घोषणध की तधिीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.08.2018

For Appellant: Shri C.Subramanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148

reassessment proceedings and after complete satisfaction regarding the sources for repayment, the assessment was completed. Hence, there is no error in the assessment order framed by the AO. Thus, there is no case for revision u/s 263. (iii) The 3rd issue raised by the Ld.Pr.CIT was with regard to mismatch of dates for payment of consideration for purchase

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 167/VIZ/2020[20102-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jun 2021

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)

For Appellant: Shri M.ChandramouleswaraFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 80I

revised u/s 263 of the Act. In response to the show cause notice issued u/s 263, the assessee filed explanation stating that the original assessment was completed u/s 143(3) by an order dated 31.03.2015 and subsequently, the assessment was taken up for reassessment u/s 147

LATE DEVERASETTY VENKATA SUBBARAO LR D.RAVI KUMAR, ,GUNTUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), , GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 339/VIZ/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam11 Mar 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.339/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09) Late Deverasetty Venkata Subba Rao Vs Income Tax Officer Lr D.Ravikumar Ward 1(3) 18-1-41, Sattenapalli Guntur Guntur [Pan : Asbpd9432C] (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 : 11.03.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.03.2020 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Suman Malik, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 292B

147 of the Act on 31.03.2011. Subsequently, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act by an order dated 16.09.2014. Subsequent to passing the order u/s 143(3), r.w.s. 263 dated 16.09.2014, the Ld.Pr.CIT has taken up the case for revision u/s 263 again and passed the order setting aside the assessment made

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 356/VIZ/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

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]

For Appellant: Shri M.Madhusudhan, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

revision u/s 263..On going through the Annexure A, there was sufficient cash balances available as per the regular books of accounts and there was no negative cash balance. It is a fact that the AO has conducted the survey u/s 133A and recorded the statements during the course of survey and found the discrepancies at the time

NAVEENA RICE INDUSTRIES vs. THE PR.CIT,, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 311/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Jul 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.311/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2012-13) M/S Naveena Rice Industries Vs. Pr.Commissioner Of R.S.No.59/2A Income Tax Tarakaturu Village Vijayawada Krishna District [Pan : Aajfn6020C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.L.Narasimha Rao, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2018 31.07.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri D.L.Narasimha Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 263

revision u/s 263.. On going through the Annexure A, there was sufficient cash balances available as per the regular books of accounts and there was no negative cash balance. It is a fact that the AO has conducted the survey u/s 133A and recorded the statements during the course of survey and found the discrepancies

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

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

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 260/VIZ/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 May 2018AY 2007-08

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(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

revise the order. In this case, the A.O. has reopened the assessment for the escapement of income and the same is offered for taxation and assessment is completed. We find that the order passed by the A.O. u/s 143(3) r.w.s. The Aryapuram Co-Op. Urban Bank Ltd., RJY 147 of the Act dated 31.12.2010 is neither erroneous

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

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 172/VIZ/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 May 2018AY 2007-08

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(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

revise the order. In this case, the A.O. has reopened the assessment for the escapement of income and the same is offered for taxation and assessment is completed. We find that the order passed by the A.O. u/s 143(3) r.w.s. The Aryapuram Co-Op. Urban Bank Ltd., RJY 147 of the Act dated 31.12.2010 is neither erroneous

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

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 290/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

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)

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153CSection 263Section 270A

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 291/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

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)

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153CSection 263Section 270A

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

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

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

ITA 153/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

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)

For Appellant: Shri Rama MurthyFor Respondent: Dr.Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263

147/-) which are taken and repaid during the FY and the Ld. AO has verified and examined the relevant documents, financial statements, books of accounts etc., submitted by the assessee before the Ld. AO and hence it is not correct to state that proper verification has not been carried on by the AO. 8. The Ld. Pr. CIT is erred

LALITHA DEVI,,KAKINADA vs. THE ACIT,, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 111/VIZ/2017[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Apr 2018AY 2007-2008

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

For Appellant: Shri P. Prabhakara MurthyFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal
Section 132Section 153CSection 54F

revised returns in response to notice u/s 153A of the Act and admitted the additional income disclosed during the course of search. The case has been selected for scrutiny. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to produce books of accounts and relevant bills & vouchers in support of expenditure claimed. In response, the assessee filed written

LALITHA DEVI,,KAKINADA vs. THE ACIT,, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 112/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Apr 2018AY 2008-2009

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

For Appellant: Shri P. Prabhakara MurthyFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal
Section 132Section 153CSection 54F

revised returns in response to notice u/s 153A of the Act and admitted the additional income disclosed during the course of search. The case has been selected for scrutiny. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to produce books of accounts and relevant bills & vouchers in support of expenditure claimed. In response, the assessee filed written

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

ITA 104/VIZ/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik,Sr.DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 801BSection 801B(10)Section 80ISection 8O

147 of the I.T.Act is against the provisions of law and facts of the case. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in deciding the reassessment proceedings are in accordance with the law. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in not accepting the legal position that notice u/s. 148 of the I.T.Act when it was issued by DCIT, Range

ABHILASH SYNERGETIC CONSTRUCTIONS & EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(5),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 108/VIZ/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik,Sr.DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 801BSection 801B(10)Section 80ISection 8O

147 of the I.T.Act is against the provisions of law and facts of the case. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in deciding the reassessment proceedings are in accordance with the law. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in not accepting the legal position that notice u/s. 148 of the I.T.Act when it was issued by DCIT, Range