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