Skip to main content

Kunta Srinivas Reddy vs. DCIT, Central Circle

Case No: ITA Nos. 549 to 554/Hyd/2026
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad 'A' Bench
Date: 23 Sep 2026

Parties Involved

appellantKunta Srinivas Reddy
respondentDCIT, Central Circle

Facts Summary

The assessee, Shri K. Srinivas Reddy, is an individual and the Managing Director of M/s. Oorjitha Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. A Search and Seizure operation under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was conducted on 18.01.2023 in the case of M/s. Oorjitha Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd., its associated entities and related individuals. Consequent to the search, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Act by issuing notice under section 148 dated 07.12.2023. In response, the assessee filed his return of income on 28.02.2024 declaring total income of Rs.73,70,190/-. Thereafter, notices under section 142(1) of the Act were issued and the assessee furnished the requisite details. The A.O., after considering the submissions of the assessee and the material available on record, completed the reassessment by making an addition of Rs.2,70,70,600/- under section 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. Accordingly, the total income of the assessee was determined at Rs.3,44,40,790/-. The A.O. also initiated penalty proceedings separately and stated that, the assessment order was passed with the prior approval of the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Range-1, Hyderabad.…

Decision in favour of

Assessee

Legal Issues

  • 1. Whether the approval accorded u/s 148B of the Act, for the purpose of reassessment order, is mechanical in nature, granted without independent application of mind and without recording the requisite satisfaction by the competent authority, and is therefore unsustainable in law.
  • 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered that the AO has erred in recording satisfaction for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271DA of the Act without appreciating the facts of the case and submissions of the appellant.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

4 precedents cited in this judgement.

Opakhya LogoOpakhya

AI-powered tax-litigation platform. Find precedents using natural language, draft submissions in minutes, and run your entire case repository from a single secure workspace.

© 2025 Opakhya. All rights reserved.

Core Features

Additional Features

  • Smart Comments
  • Export Options
  • Quick Copy
  • Analytics Dashboard
Version 2.0.1•Last updated: October 2025
Powered by AI & Machine Learning