SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 21014

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH)
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GUNTUR – Appellant
Versus
KAILASHNADH NAMBURU GUNTUR – Respondent
ITA 475/VIZ/2025[2017-18]



##PAGE1##

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, िवशाखाप(cid:517)नम पीठ, िवशाखाप(cid:517)नम

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

BENCH: DIVN

BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER

AND

SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA 475/VIZ/2025

िनधा(cid:330)रण वष(cid:330)/Assessment Year: 2017-18)

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF KAILASHNADH NAMBURU

INCOME TAX

5-45-16, 4/10, BRODIPET

CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, C R GUNTUR-, ANDHRA PRADESH

BUILDINGS, K.V. THOTA,, Vs.

GUNTUR-522004,

ANDHRA PRADESH

अपीलाथ(cid:334) Appellant (cid:366)(cid:529)थ(cid:334) Respondent

Permanent Account Number of Assessee: AAYPN5800F

ITA 476/VIZ/2025

(िनधा(cid:330)रण वष(cid:330)/Assessment Year: 2020-21)

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF NAMBURU KAILASHNADH

INCOME TAX

5-45-18, 4/10, BRODIPET

CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, C.R. GUNTUR-, ANDHRA PRADESH

BUILDINGS, K.V. THOTA, Vs.

GUNTUR-522004,

ANDHRA PRADESH

अपीलाथ(cid:334) Appellant (cid:366)(cid:529)थ(cid:334) Respondent

Permanent Account Number of Assessee: AAYPN5800F

Revenue is represented by: Shri Avijit Mishra, CIT(DR)

Assessee is represented by: Shri MV Prasad, CA

सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 16-July-2026

घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 22-July-2026

1

##PAGE2##

ITA 475/VIZ/2025

KAILASHNADH NAMBURU

आदेश / ORDER

PER RAVISH SOOD, JM:

The present appeals filed by the Revenue are directed against the respective

orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless

Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, [for short, “CIT(A)”] dated 21/06/2025, which in

turn arises from the respective orders passed by the Assessing Officer (for short,

“AO”) under Section 153C of the Income tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) dated

30/03/2022 and under Section 143(3) r.w.s 153C of the Act, dated 29/03/2022 for

AY 2017-18 and AY 2020-21. As a common issue is involved in the captioned

appeals, the same are being taken up and disposed of vide a consolidated order.

We shall first take up the revenue’s appeal in ITA No. 475/Viz/2025 for AY 2017-

18, and the order therein passed shall apply mutatis mutandis for disposing of the

other appeal. The revenue in ITA No. 475/Viz/2025 for AY 2017-18 has assailed

the CIT(A) order on the following grounds of appeal before us:

“REVISED GROUNDS OF APPEAL A.Y. 2017-18

1. The order of the Ld.CIT(A) is erroneous both on the facts and in law.

2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in summarily allowing the appeal of the

assessee on sole ground of non-admissible seized material evidence used by the

Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings u/s.153C consequent to search

action conducted in the case of M/s.Polisetty Somasundaram group.

3. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in giving a finding that the pen drive seized from

the business premises of M/s.Polisetty Somasundaram group and marked as

Annexure A/PSS/ CORP/19 was an inadmissible digital evidence as held by

Hon'ble ITAT in the case of M/s.Polisetty Somasundaram and hence the same

can't be considered as avalid digital evidence in the case of the assessee. The

Ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the said decision of Hon'ble

2

##PAGE3##

ITA 475/VIZ/2025

KAILASHNADH NAMBURU

ITAT was not accepted by the Department and further appeal to Hon'ble High

Court was filed and the same is pending adjudication as on date.

4. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing relief to the assessee by considering

the decision of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of M/s.Polisetty Soma sundaram by

ignoring the fact that the seized pen drive was an independent primary source of

evidence u/s.65B of Indian Evidence Act and when the extracts of the said pen

drive were confronted to the key person Sri Poliseety Shyam Sundar of

M/s.Polisetty Somasundram group, has never raised any objection with regard

to the contents of the said seized pen drive and moreover confirmed the financial

transactions done with the assesse in his sworn statement u/s 132(4) dated

08.06.2020.

5. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the seized material

marked as A/PSS/CORP/18 consists hard copies in the form of printouts of excel

sheets. The Ld.CIT(A) ou

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top