INCOME TAX OFFICER, TENALI vs. SURYAPRAKASARAO KANAPARTHY, BETHAPUDI, REPALLE

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations, while for the appeal filed by the revenue having been rendered as academic in nature, is ...

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.239/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Suryaprakasarao Tenali. Kanaparthy, Bethapudi, Repalle, Bapatla. Pan: Dmqpk7509P (Appellant) (Respondent)

69A is not based on adequate evidence and hence requires to be deleted.” 5. In the result appeal for Assessment Order 2018-19 is hereby allowed. 10. The revenue being aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before us. Also, the assessee is before us as a Cross Objector. 11. Sri G.V.N. Hari

MARISETTI DHANA TATAJI,TADEPALLIGUDEM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TADEPALLIGUDEM

u/s. 151 as per the\namended provisions of law.\nPage. No 16\n18. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observation, concur with the Ld. AR\nthat in the present case before us for A.Y.2018-19, wherein notice under section\n148 of the Act was issued on 04.04.2022, i.e. beyond a period of three years\nfrom the end of the assessment

MARISETTI DHANA TATAJI,TADEPALLIGUDEM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TADEPALLIGUDEM

reassessment proceedings as per the substituted\nprovisions of sections 147 to 151 of the IT Act as per the Finance Act, 2021,\nsubject to compliance of all the procedural requirements and the defences, which\nmay be available to the assessee under the substituted provisions of sections 147\nto 151 of the IT Act and which may be available under

MARISETTI DHANA TATAJI,TADEPALLIGUDEM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TADEPALLIGUDEM

reassessment proceedings as per the substituted\nprovisions of sections 147 to 151 of the IT Act as per the Finance Act, 2021,\nsubject to compliance of all the procedural requirements and the defences, which\nmay be available to the assessee under the substituted provisions of sections 147\nto 151 of the IT Act and which may be available under

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GUDIWADA vs. CHAGANTIPADU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED NOH957, CHAGANTIPADU VILLAGE,

69A in these circumstances is\nlegally unsustainable.\n3. The LD. CIT(A) ought to have held that the assessing officer erred\nin not appreciating that the assessee society is rightly entitled for claim of\nits interest income as exempt under chapter VIA of the IT Act.\"\nPage No. 3\nI.T.A. No. 641/VIZ/2025\nC.O. No. 42/VIZ/2025\nChagantipadu Primary Agri Coop Credit

SATYANARAYANA KODURU,KRISHNA DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GUDIWADA

In the result, the 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.491/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Satyanarayana Koduru, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Krishna District. Ward-1, Pan:Altpk1048C Gudiwada. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 02/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm :

u/s 144B and 151A of the Act. The jurisdictional Assessing Officer (ITO Ward 1, Gudiwada) lacked authority and competence in issuing the said notices. Consequently, the entire reassessment proceedings and the order passed thereunder are vold ab initio and liable to be quashed. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,16,000/- made

VIKRAM BRAHMENDRA SATYAJIT MULPURI,KRISHNA DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the 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.534/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Vikram Brahmendra Satyajit Vs. Income Tax Officer, Mulpuri, Ward-3(1), Krishna District. Vijayawada. Pan: Aonpm1893G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 02/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 19/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm:

69A of the Act of Rs. 15,11,000/-, determined the income of the assessee at Rs. 16,73,660/-. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but without success. 5. The assessee, being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A), has carried the matter in appeal before us. 6. Shri C. Subrahmanyam

SHAIK SAIDA,NUZVID vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VIJAYAWADA

69A of the Act. Thus,\nthe Ld. AO determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.\n77,74,200/- and passed the\nassessment\norder dated\n30/01/2024. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, the\nassessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A).\n5.\nBefore the Ld. CIT(A) there was no response from the assessee to\nthe

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

147 r.w.s. 144 of Income\nTax Act, 1961 (in short 'Act') dated 23.01.2024.\n2.\nBrief facts of the case are that, assessee being an individual and has not\nfiled return of income for the assessment year under consideration under section\n139 of the Act. As per the information available with the department, the\nassessee has made cash deposits of Rs.61

SHAIK SAIDA,NUZVID vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

Bench: the Tribunal and the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons, similar to the three appeals, which are extracted herein below:

147 r.w.s 144 of the Act by treating the cash deposits aggregating to Rs. 77,74,200/- as unexplained money in the hands of the assessee U/s. 69A of the Act. Thus, the Ld. AO determined the total income of the assessee at Rs. 77,74,200/- and passed the assessment order dated 30/01/2024. Aggrieved by the order

SHAIK SAIDA,NUZVID vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

Bench: the Tribunal and the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons, similar to the three appeals, which are extracted herein below:

147 r.w.s 144 of the Act by treating the cash deposits aggregating to Rs. 77,74,200/- as unexplained money in the hands of the assessee U/s. 69A of the Act. Thus, the Ld. AO determined the total income of the assessee at Rs. 77,74,200/- and passed the assessment order dated 30/01/2024. Aggrieved by the order

VULLI RADHAKRISHNA,TUNI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TUNI

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.359/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vulli Radhakrishna, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Tuni. Ward-1, Pan: Aegpv1751H Tuni. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 04/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 19/12/2025 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 (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 17/03/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short “A.O.”) Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”) Dated 26/03/2022 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2 Vulli Radhakrishna Vs. Ito

u/s 69A of the Act towards unexplained cash deposits in the bank accounts. 5. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in 4. sustaining the addition of Rs.11,79,160 made by the assessing officer towards unexplained payment of credit card bills. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in 5. sustaining

SRINIVASA RAO SIRIVURI PROPRIETOR,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VIZIANAGARAM

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

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

section 69A of the Act and determined the income at Rs.89,57,554/-. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but without success. 5. The assessee, aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. At the outset, it is noticed from the record that

CHODAY JANAKI RAMAYYA CHOWDARY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KAKINADA

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

reassessment proceedings as void ab inito in as much as the notice was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) as against the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO). 4. Without prejudice to Ground no 2 and 3, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.39,37,000 made u/s 69A

NANDYALA NAGA VENKATA RAJU,WEST GODAVARI DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TANAKU

section 147 r.w.s, 144 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (for short,\n\"the Act\"), dated 15.03.2025 for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The assessee has\nassailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal:\n\"1.\nThe order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is\ncontrary to the facts and also the law applicable

PADARTHI VENKATA SIVANAGENDRA PRASADA,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TENALI

147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act by determining the income\nof the assessee at Rs.1,17,00,520/- by treating an amount of Rs.1,21,13,500/- as\nunexplained money under section 69A of the Act.\n6. On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee carried the\nmatter before

NARASIMHA RAO JAMMIGUMPULA,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NARASARAOPET

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A).

69A of the Act. 5. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.” 4. Further, the assessee has also raised Additional Grounds of appeal as under: “1. The notice dated 07/04/2022 issued U/s. 148 of the Act is barred by limitation by virtue of 1st proviso to section

MAHALAKSHMI SANAGALA,VUYYURU vs. INOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GUDIWADA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

69A of the Act.\n7. On being aggrieved by the addition made by the Ld. AO, assessee filed\nan appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the Ld. AO since\nassessee has not responded to any of the notice / opportunities provided to the\nassessee.\n8. On being aggrieved by the order