आयकर अपील(cid:547)य अ(cid:876)धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad (cid:373)ी रिवश सूद,(cid:586)ाियक सद(cid:735) एव ं(cid:373)ी मधुसूदन साविड़या लेखा सद(cid:735) सम(cid:407) |

Before Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.1462/Hyd/2025 (िनधा१रण वष१/Assessment Year: 2019-20)

Shri Srinivas Chowdary Vallabaneni, Secunderabad PAN:AEIPV3757R	Vs.	Dy.CIT Central Circle 1(4) Hyderabad
(Appellant)		(Respondent)
िनधा१ ौरती (cid:554)ारा/Assessee by: Shri Phaneendra Nag, CA
राज(cid:830) व (cid:554)ारा/Revenue by:: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr.DR
स ुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 17/11/2025
घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 26/11/2025

आदेश/ORDER Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

This appeal is filed by Shri Srinivas Chowdary Vallabaneni (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. CIT(A)”) dated 15.07.2025 for the A.Y. 2019-20.

2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual deriving income from remuneration, income from house property and income from other sources. A search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) was conducted on 05.10.2018 in the cases of various persons, including the assessee. Subsequently, the assessee filed return of income for Assessment Year 2019–20 under section 139(1) of the Act on 31.08.2019, admitting a total income of Rs.98,03,260/-, which included Rs.35 lakhs offered by the assessee as additional income during the course of the search proceedings. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and accordingly notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued by the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”). During the assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO taxed the sum of Rs.35 lakhs disclosed by the assessee during the search, including Rs.7 lakhs in cash seized during the search, by invoking section 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. The appeal of the assessee for the treatment of addition of Rs.35 lakhs as income under section 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act had reached this Tribunal. Vide order dated 30.08.2023 in ITA No. 177/Hyd/2023, this Tribunal held that the provisions of section 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act shall apply only to the cash component of Rs.7 lakhs, and the balance Rs.28 lakhs is to be taxed under the normal provisions. Pursuant to this order of the Tribunal, the Ld. AO passed a consequential order on 17.10.2023, taxing Rs.7 lakhs under section 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. On the basis of taxation of Rs.7 lakhs under section 69B r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act, the Ld. AO initiated penalty proceedings under section 271AAC of the Act and passed penalty order dated 27.03.2024, levying penalty of Rs.54,600/- on the assessee.

4. Aggrieved with the penalty order of the Ld. AO the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the penalty levied by the Ld. AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

5. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the outset, the Learned Authorized Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that the solitary issue out of the grounds of appeal of the assessee is the penalty of Rs.54,600/- levied under section 271AAC of the Act by the Ld. AO. In this regard the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had already disclosed the sum of Rs.35 lakhs (including the Rs.7 lakhs cash component) during the search proceedings and further included the same in the return of income filed under section 139(1) of the Act. It was contended that there was no concealment and that the assessee had cooperated fully with the search authorities. The Ld. AR further submitted that since the assessee disclosed the income in the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act and subsequently offered it

Click Here to Read the rest of this document