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

seizure action at the premises of the appellant including the factory of M/s. Bharathi Soap Works did not yield conclusive documentary evidence of unaccounted production of finished goods. However, discrepancies were noticed both in the stock of raw materials as well as in the stock of finished goods This could not have been possible in case the production was entirely

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

seizure action at the premises of the appellant including the factory of M/s. Bharathi Soap Works did not yield conclusive documentary evidence of unaccounted production of finished goods. However, discrepancies were noticed both in the stock of raw materials as well as in the stock of finished goods This could not have been possible in case the production was entirely

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

seizure action at the premises of the appellant including the factory of M/s. Bharathi Soap Works did not yield conclusive documentary evidence of unaccounted production of finished goods. However, discrepancies were noticed both in the stock of raw materials as well as in the stock of finished goods This could not have been possible in case the production was entirely

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

seizure action at the premises of the appellant including the factory of M/s. Bharathi Soap Works did not yield conclusive documentary evidence of unaccounted production of finished goods. However, discrepancies were noticed both in the stock of raw materials as well as in the stock of finished goods This could not have been possible in case the production was entirely

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

seizure action at the premises of the appellant including the factory of M/s. Bharathi Soap Works did not yield conclusive documentary evidence of unaccounted production of finished goods. However, discrepancies were noticed both in the stock of raw materials as well as in the stock of finished goods This could not have been possible in case the production was entirely

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

seizure action at the premises of the appellant including the factory of M/s. Bharathi Soap Works did not yield conclusive documentary evidence of unaccounted production of finished goods. However, discrepancies were noticed both in the stock of raw materials as well as in the stock of finished goods This could not have been possible in case the production was entirely

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

seizure action at the premises of the appellant including the factory of M/s. Bharathi Soap Works did not yield conclusive documentary evidence of unaccounted production of finished goods. However, discrepancies were noticed both in the stock of raw materials as well as in the stock of finished goods This could not have been possible in case the production was entirely

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

seizure action at the premises of the appellant including the factory of M/s. Bharathi Soap Works did not yield conclusive documentary evidence of unaccounted production of finished goods. However, discrepancies were noticed both in the stock of raw materials as well as in the stock of finished goods This could not have been possible in case the production was entirely

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT LTD, GUNTUR

seizure operations had covered under section 132 of\nthe Act for nine premises and under section 133A of the Act for the 15 premises.\nDuring the course of search proceedings, the search team noticed that assessee\ngenerated unaccounted income by way of production suppression of eggs and the\nPage No. 3\nITA Nos. 228, 229, 230 & 231/VIZ/2025\nC.O

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT. LTD, GUNTUR

seizure operations had covered under section 132 of\nthe Act for nine premises and under section 133A of the Act for the 15 premises.\nDuring the course of search proceedings, the search team noticed that assessee\ngenerated unaccounted income by way of production suppression of eggs and the\nPage No. 3\nITA Nos. 228, 229, 230 & 231/VIZ/2025\nC.O

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT. LTD., GUNTUR

seizure operations had covered under section 132 of\nthe Act for nine premises and under section 133A of the Act for the 15 premises.\nDuring the course of search proceedings, the search team noticed that assessee\ngenerated unaccounted income by way of production suppression of eggs and the\nPage No. 3\nITA Nos. 228, 229, 230 & 231/VIZ/2025\nC.O

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT. LTD., GUNTUR

seizure operations had covered under section 132 of\nthe Act for nine premises and under section 133A of the Act for the 15 premises.\nDuring the course of search proceedings, the search team noticed that assessee\ngenerated unaccounted income by way of production suppression of eggs and the\nPage No. 3\nITA Nos. 228, 229, 230 & 231/VIZ/2025\nC.O

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. POOSARLA SATYAVATHI, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed in limine and Cross objection filed is assessee is dismissed as infructuous

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

transferring it to the assessee company as investment in share capital. He therefore stated that the sources remained unexplained and hence the addition made by the Ld. CIT(A) be sustained. 11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. From the submissions made by the Ld.AR, we find from the summary of sworn statements

LINTON PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,VIZIANAGARAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed in limine and Cross objection filed is assessee is dismissed as infructuous

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

transferring it to the assessee company as investment in share capital. He therefore stated that the sources remained unexplained and hence the addition made by the Ld. CIT(A) be sustained. 11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. From the submissions made by the Ld.AR, we find from the summary of sworn statements

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SHRI APPARAO MUKKAMALA, USA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed, while for the cross-objection filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI BALAKRISHNAN. S, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

transfer of 1,06,900 shares by the assessee at Rs. 657 per share for a total consideration of Rs. 7,02,33,300. 4. On the other hand, the seized scribbling contained entries which the department construed as cash payments to certain persons, including the assessee. The noting in the seized scribblings mentioned, viz. “18/08/2015 – 100 cash Appa

HASINI INFRA CONSTRUCTIONS AND DEVELOPERS,KAKINADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.9, 10 & 11/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Hasini Infra Constructions & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Developers, Income Tax, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Central Circle-1, Kakinada. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 24 & 25/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Hasini Infra Constructions Income Tax & Developers, Central Circle-1, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Rajahmundry. Kakinada. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

price ranging from Rs. 3,100/- to Rs. 3,400/- per sq ft inclusive of additional works. The Ld. AR also invited our attention to Page No.15 of the seized document A/HICD/GNT/02 wherein the Flat No.203 was sold to Mr. P. Ravi Kumar which was taken as example by the Ld. AO and stated that the document shows that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. HASINI INFRA CONSRTUCTIONS& DEVELOPERS, KAKINADA

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.9, 10 & 11/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Hasini Infra Constructions & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Developers, Income Tax, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Central Circle-1, Kakinada. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 24 & 25/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Hasini Infra Constructions Income Tax & Developers, Central Circle-1, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Rajahmundry. Kakinada. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

price ranging from Rs. 3,100/- to Rs. 3,400/- per sq ft inclusive of additional works. The Ld. AR also invited our attention to Page No.15 of the seized document A/HICD/GNT/02 wherein the Flat No.203 was sold to Mr. P. Ravi Kumar which was taken as example by the Ld. AO and stated that the document shows that

HASINI INFRA CONSTRUCTIONS AND DEVELOPERS,KAKINADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.9, 10 & 11/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Hasini Infra Constructions & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Developers, Income Tax, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Central Circle-1, Kakinada. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 24 & 25/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Hasini Infra Constructions Income Tax & Developers, Central Circle-1, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Rajahmundry. Kakinada. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

price ranging from Rs. 3,100/- to Rs. 3,400/- per sq ft inclusive of additional works. The Ld. AR also invited our attention to Page No.15 of the seized document A/HICD/GNT/02 wherein the Flat No.203 was sold to Mr. P. Ravi Kumar which was taken as example by the Ld. AO and stated that the document shows that