ITAT Hyderabad Bench

10,989 judgments

CHAGANAM LALITHAMMA & BHASKAR RAO MEMORIAL TRUST,HYDERABAD vs DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 373/HYD/2025[2024-25]Status: Disposed5/6/2025AY 2024-25

Shri Vijay Pal Rao (Vice President), Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos.373 & 374/Hyd/2025 | Chaganam Lalithamma & Bhaskar Rao Memorial Trust, Hyderabad PAN:AACTC8344D (Appellant) | Vs. | Dy.CIT Circle 5 (1) Hyderabad (Respondent) | |---|---|---| | निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee by: | Shri P Vinod, Advocate | | राजस्व द्वारा /Revenue by:: | Shri Narender Kumar Naik, CIT(DR) | | सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of hearing: | 05/06/2025 | | घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: | 05/06/202

DEVARAPALLI BHARATHAMMA,HYDERABAD vs ITO, WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 355/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: Heard5/6/2025AY 2015-16

SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G (Accountant Member)

NARENDER BATCHU,HYDERABAD vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 111/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed5/6/2025AY 2017-18

the learned CIT(A), the assessee claimed that source for cash deposit is out of business receipts. The learned CIT(A) after considering relevant submissions of the assessee and also taking note of various reasons given by the Assessing Officer to make addition towards cash deposit, sustained the addition on the ground that, assessee initially claimed to have received loans from friends, relatives and also received money from his wife, which is the source for the cash deposit. However, witho

GOVIND GOUD DADIVELA,MAHABUBNAGAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MAHABUBNAGAR

ITA 92/HYD/2025[2013-20214]Status: Heard4/6/2025

TELANGANA WATER SPORTS ASSOCIATION,HYDERABAD vs CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

ITA 362/HYD/2025[2025-26]Status: Disposed4/6/2025AY 2025-26

SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)

YUVA JAGRUTHI FOUNDATION,MAHABUB NAGAR vs CIT (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

ITA 361/HYD/2025[2025-26]Status: Disposed4/6/2025AY 2025-26

the Tribunal. 3. The Learned Authorised Representatives of the assessees submitted that, the impugned orders passed by the Ld. CIT(E) are non-speaking orders. It was contended that the Ld. CIT(E) has not pointed out any specific deficiency in the documents submitted by the assessees, nor has the assessees been afforded proper opportunity of being heard. The Ld. ARs prayed before the bench that the matter may be restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication, after provid

NEW HOPE ASSOCIATION,HYDERABAD vs CIT (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

ITA 360/HYD/2025[2025-26]Status: Disposed4/6/2025AY 2025-26

SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)

THE ENDOMETRIOSIS FOUNDATION OF INDIA,HYDERABAD vs CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

ITA 359/HYD/2025[NA]Status: Disposed4/6/2025

SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)

THE ENDOMETRIOSIS FOUNDATION OF INDIA,HYDERABAD vs CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

ITA 358/HYD/2025[NA]Status: Disposed4/6/2025

SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)

ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERAABAD vs DEENABABU KONDUBHATLA, HYDERABAD

ITA 347/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed4/6/2025AY 2022-23

us : 1. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred both in law and on facts of the case in setting aside the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144C(3) dated 24.05.2024 for making a fresh assessment.