← All Phrases

“reasonable cause”

PenaltySection 273BSection 273B7,285 judgments

The decision most relied on for reasonable cause is Ashok Pai v. CIT (292 ITR 11), cited in 812 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on reasonable cause

Ashok Pai v. CIT
292 ITR 11 · 2007 · Supreme Court
812
citing judgments

“Concealment of particulars of income” and “furnishing inaccurate particulars of income” are two distinct offences under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. A penalty cannot be levied under one limb if the show cause notice or basis for penalty specifies the other, as this constitutes a complete variance in the reasons for assuming jurisdiction.

Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors.
2 SCC 107 · 1987 · Supreme Court
451
citing judgments

Courts must adopt a liberal approach when considering applications for condonation of delay, preferring to decide cases on their merits rather than allowing technicalities of limitation to scuttle justice. This principle applies to ensure the substantive rights of parties are not defeated by minor delays.

Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy
7 SCC 123 · 1998 · Supreme Court
368
citing judgments

The Supreme Court outlines the principles for condoning delay in filing appeals, stating that a litigant's lapse is not always a bar if the explanation is bona fide and not a dilatory strategy. Courts should show utmost consideration to suitors and prioritize substantial justice unless the delay is deliberately to gain time.

Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust v. ADIT
115 TTJ 419 · 2008 · ITAT
292
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance with a notice issued under Section 142(1) is not leviable when the assessee demonstrates a reasonable cause for such non-compliance. The decision defines what constitutes 'reasonable cause' in this context.

Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT
280 ITR 357 · 2006 · High Court
182
citing judgments

The expression "sufficient cause" for condoning delay in filing appeals must receive a liberal and purposive construction. This approach aims to advance substantial justice, which is of paramount importance.

CIT v. K.S.P. Shanmugavel Nadai and Ors.
153 ITR 596 · 1985 · High Court
171
citing judgments

Where a reasonable cause for delay in filing an appeal exists, the period of delay may not be a relevant factor for condonation. The court has condoned even substantial delays, such as nearly 21 years, based on the presence of a reasonable cause.

People Education and Economic Development Society (PEEDS) v. ITO
100 ITD 87 · 2006 · ITAT
121
citing judgments

When substantial justice and procedural technicalities are in conflict, especially in cases involving non-deliberate delay, the cause of substantial justice must be prioritized. The opposing party cannot claim a vested right to benefit from injustice due to such delays.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd.
262 ITR 260 · 2003 · High Court
121
citing judgments

Journal entries for accepting or repaying loans and deposits, without any actual cash transaction, do not violate the provisions of Section 269SS or Section 269T of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, such transactions do not attract penalties under Section 271D or Section 271E.

Judgments citing reasonable cause

Sri Mallikarjuna Swamy Devasthanam, Karimnagar vs. CIT(Exemption), Basheerbagh, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1083/HYD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1082 & 1083/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2025-26) M/S. Sri Mallikarjuna Swamy Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. Devasthanam, Karimnagar. (Exemption), Pan: Aamts0172M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: These Appeals Are Filed By M/S. Sri Mallikarjuna Swamy Devasthanam (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(E)”), Dated 12.03.2025 & 17.03.2025 For The A.Y. 2025-26 Respectively. Since The Issues Involved In Both These Appeals Are Identical & Belong To The Same Assessee, One Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

upon receipt of physical copies, the appeals were duly signed and filed. In our considered view, the explanation offered by the assessee constitutes a reasonable cause within the meaning of law. Further, since the Ld. DR has not raised any serious objection, and keeping in mind that substantive justice should

Sri Mallikarjuna Swamy Devasthanam, Karimnagar, Telangana vs. CIT (Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1082/HYD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1082 & 1083/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2025-26) M/S. Sri Mallikarjuna Swamy Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. Devasthanam, Karimnagar. (Exemption), Pan: Aamts0172M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: These Appeals Are Filed By M/S. Sri Mallikarjuna Swamy Devasthanam (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(E)”), Dated 12.03.2025 & 17.03.2025 For The A.Y. 2025-26 Respectively. Since The Issues Involved In Both These Appeals Are Identical & Belong To The Same Assessee, One Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

upon receipt of physical copies, the appeals were duly signed and filed. In our considered view, the explanation offered by the assessee constitutes a reasonable cause within the meaning of law. Further, since the Ld. DR has not raised any serious objection, and keeping in mind that substantive justice should

Sudhakar Akutota, Warangal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Warangal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1068/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1068/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14) Shri Sudhakar Akutota, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-1, Warangal. Warangal. Pan: Abapa0044M (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri A. V. Raghuram, Advocate. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Sudhakar Akutota (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 05.06.2024 For The A.Y. 2013-14. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 296 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Accompanied By An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For The Delay. The Learned Authorised

For Appellant: Shri A. V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, SR-DR

service of notices. However, no notices were served by the Ld. CIT(A) on such address. He argued that the assessee thus had reasonable cause for not attending before the Ld. CIT(A) and for the consequent delay in approaching the Tribunal. It was also contended that the assessee ... present appeal on 23.06.2025. Considering the overall circumstances, we are satisfied that the delay was neither wilful nor deliberate but caused due to reasonable cause. In this regard, we draw support from the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Vidya Shankar Jaiswal vs. The Income

Sri Veeranjaneya Swamy Nithya Annadaanam Trust, Kadapa vs. CIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by all the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1030/HYD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Ita No Appellant Respondent 1 1021/Hyd/2025 Sree Rama Krtishna High Cit (Exemptions) School Committee Kadapa Hyderabad Pan:Abmas5115J 2 1022/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 3 1023/Hyd/2025 Sri Jhamsingh Balaji -Do- Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Hyderabad Pan: Aabts6884P 4 1024/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 5 1027/Hyd/2025 Sree Sree Sree -Do- Veeranjaneya Swamy Vari Devasthanam Gandikshetram Chakrayape Kadapa, Pan: Aatts6060R 6 1028/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 7 1029/Hyd/2025 Sri Veeranjaneya Swamy -Do- Nithya Annadanam Trust, Kadapa, Pan: Aafts2637C 8 1030/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Are 4 Set Of 2 Appeals By 4 Assessees Filed Against 8 Separate Orders Of The Learned Cit (Exemptions) Dated 12/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 19/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 12/03/2025 & 17/03/2025

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

explained by the assessee as well as the submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee, we are satisfied that the assessees were having reasonable cause for the delay of 11 & 13 days respectively in filing of these appeals. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 11 & 13 days in filing

Sri Veeranjaneya Swamy Nithya Annadaanam Trust, Kadapa vs. CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by all the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1029/HYD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Ita No Appellant Respondent 1 1021/Hyd/2025 Sree Rama Krtishna High Cit (Exemptions) School Committee Kadapa Hyderabad Pan:Abmas5115J 2 1022/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 3 1023/Hyd/2025 Sri Jhamsingh Balaji -Do- Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Hyderabad Pan: Aabts6884P 4 1024/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 5 1027/Hyd/2025 Sree Sree Sree -Do- Veeranjaneya Swamy Vari Devasthanam Gandikshetram Chakrayape Kadapa, Pan: Aatts6060R 6 1028/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 7 1029/Hyd/2025 Sri Veeranjaneya Swamy -Do- Nithya Annadanam Trust, Kadapa, Pan: Aafts2637C 8 1030/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Are 4 Set Of 2 Appeals By 4 Assessees Filed Against 8 Separate Orders Of The Learned Cit (Exemptions) Dated 12/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 19/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 12/03/2025 & 17/03/2025

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

explained by the assessee as well as the submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee, we are satisfied that the assessees were having reasonable cause for the delay of 11 & 13 days respectively in filing of these appeals. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 11 & 13 days in filing

Sree Sree Sree Veeranjaneya Swamy Vari Devasthanam Gandikshetram Chakrayape, Kadapa vs. CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by all the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1028/HYD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Ita No Appellant Respondent 1 1021/Hyd/2025 Sree Rama Krtishna High Cit (Exemptions) School Committee Kadapa Hyderabad Pan:Abmas5115J 2 1022/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 3 1023/Hyd/2025 Sri Jhamsingh Balaji -Do- Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Hyderabad Pan: Aabts6884P 4 1024/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 5 1027/Hyd/2025 Sree Sree Sree -Do- Veeranjaneya Swamy Vari Devasthanam Gandikshetram Chakrayape Kadapa, Pan: Aatts6060R 6 1028/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 7 1029/Hyd/2025 Sri Veeranjaneya Swamy -Do- Nithya Annadanam Trust, Kadapa, Pan: Aafts2637C 8 1030/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Are 4 Set Of 2 Appeals By 4 Assessees Filed Against 8 Separate Orders Of The Learned Cit (Exemptions) Dated 12/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 19/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 12/03/2025 & 17/03/2025

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

explained by the assessee as well as the submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee, we are satisfied that the assessees were having reasonable cause for the delay of 11 & 13 days respectively in filing of these appeals. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 11 & 13 days in filing

Sree Sree Sree Veeranjaneya Swamy Vari Devasthanam Gandikshetram Chakrayape, Kadapa vs. CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by all the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1027/HYD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Ita No Appellant Respondent 1 1021/Hyd/2025 Sree Rama Krtishna High Cit (Exemptions) School Committee Kadapa Hyderabad Pan:Abmas5115J 2 1022/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 3 1023/Hyd/2025 Sri Jhamsingh Balaji -Do- Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Hyderabad Pan: Aabts6884P 4 1024/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 5 1027/Hyd/2025 Sree Sree Sree -Do- Veeranjaneya Swamy Vari Devasthanam Gandikshetram Chakrayape Kadapa, Pan: Aatts6060R 6 1028/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 7 1029/Hyd/2025 Sri Veeranjaneya Swamy -Do- Nithya Annadanam Trust, Kadapa, Pan: Aafts2637C 8 1030/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Are 4 Set Of 2 Appeals By 4 Assessees Filed Against 8 Separate Orders Of The Learned Cit (Exemptions) Dated 12/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 19/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 12/03/2025 & 17/03/2025

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

explained by the assessee as well as the submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee, we are satisfied that the assessees were having reasonable cause for the delay of 11 & 13 days respectively in filing of these appeals. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 11 & 13 days in filing

Sri Jhamsingh Balaji Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Hyderabad vs. CIT(Exemption), Hyderabab

In the result, appeals filed by all the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1024/HYD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Ita No Appellant Respondent 1 1021/Hyd/2025 Sree Rama Krtishna High Cit (Exemptions) School Committee Kadapa Hyderabad Pan:Abmas5115J 2 1022/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 3 1023/Hyd/2025 Sri Jhamsingh Balaji -Do- Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Hyderabad Pan: Aabts6884P 4 1024/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 5 1027/Hyd/2025 Sree Sree Sree -Do- Veeranjaneya Swamy Vari Devasthanam Gandikshetram Chakrayape Kadapa, Pan: Aatts6060R 6 1028/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 7 1029/Hyd/2025 Sri Veeranjaneya Swamy -Do- Nithya Annadanam Trust, Kadapa, Pan: Aafts2637C 8 1030/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Are 4 Set Of 2 Appeals By 4 Assessees Filed Against 8 Separate Orders Of The Learned Cit (Exemptions) Dated 12/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 19/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 12/03/2025 & 17/03/2025

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

explained by the assessee as well as the submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee, we are satisfied that the assessees were having reasonable cause for the delay of 11 & 13 days respectively in filing of these appeals. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 11 & 13 days in filing

Sri Jhamsingh Balaji Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Hyderabad vs. CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by all the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1023/HYD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Ita No Appellant Respondent 1 1021/Hyd/2025 Sree Rama Krtishna High Cit (Exemptions) School Committee Kadapa Hyderabad Pan:Abmas5115J 2 1022/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 3 1023/Hyd/2025 Sri Jhamsingh Balaji -Do- Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Hyderabad Pan: Aabts6884P 4 1024/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 5 1027/Hyd/2025 Sree Sree Sree -Do- Veeranjaneya Swamy Vari Devasthanam Gandikshetram Chakrayape Kadapa, Pan: Aatts6060R 6 1028/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 7 1029/Hyd/2025 Sri Veeranjaneya Swamy -Do- Nithya Annadanam Trust, Kadapa, Pan: Aafts2637C 8 1030/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Are 4 Set Of 2 Appeals By 4 Assessees Filed Against 8 Separate Orders Of The Learned Cit (Exemptions) Dated 12/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 19/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 12/03/2025 & 17/03/2025

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

explained by the assessee as well as the submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee, we are satisfied that the assessees were having reasonable cause for the delay of 11 & 13 days respectively in filing of these appeals. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 11 & 13 days in filing

Sree Ramakrishna High School Committee, Kadapa vs. CIT (Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by all the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1022/HYD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Ita No Appellant Respondent 1 1021/Hyd/2025 Sree Rama Krtishna High Cit (Exemptions) School Committee Kadapa Hyderabad Pan:Abmas5115J 2 1022/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 3 1023/Hyd/2025 Sri Jhamsingh Balaji -Do- Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Hyderabad Pan: Aabts6884P 4 1024/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 5 1027/Hyd/2025 Sree Sree Sree -Do- Veeranjaneya Swamy Vari Devasthanam Gandikshetram Chakrayape Kadapa, Pan: Aatts6060R 6 1028/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 7 1029/Hyd/2025 Sri Veeranjaneya Swamy -Do- Nithya Annadanam Trust, Kadapa, Pan: Aafts2637C 8 1030/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Are 4 Set Of 2 Appeals By 4 Assessees Filed Against 8 Separate Orders Of The Learned Cit (Exemptions) Dated 12/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 19/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 12/03/2025 & 17/03/2025

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

explained by the assessee as well as the submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee, we are satisfied that the assessees were having reasonable cause for the delay of 11 & 13 days respectively in filing of these appeals. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 11 & 13 days in filing

Sree Ramakrishna High School Committee, Kadapa vs. CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by all the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1021/HYD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Ita No Appellant Respondent 1 1021/Hyd/2025 Sree Rama Krtishna High Cit (Exemptions) School Committee Kadapa Hyderabad Pan:Abmas5115J 2 1022/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 3 1023/Hyd/2025 Sri Jhamsingh Balaji -Do- Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Hyderabad Pan: Aabts6884P 4 1024/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 5 1027/Hyd/2025 Sree Sree Sree -Do- Veeranjaneya Swamy Vari Devasthanam Gandikshetram Chakrayape Kadapa, Pan: Aatts6060R 6 1028/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 7 1029/Hyd/2025 Sri Veeranjaneya Swamy -Do- Nithya Annadanam Trust, Kadapa, Pan: Aafts2637C 8 1030/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Are 4 Set Of 2 Appeals By 4 Assessees Filed Against 8 Separate Orders Of The Learned Cit (Exemptions) Dated 12/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 19/03/2025, 13/03/2025, 17/03/2025, 12/03/2025 & 17/03/2025

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

explained by the assessee as well as the submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee, we are satisfied that the assessees were having reasonable cause for the delay of 11 & 13 days respectively in filing of these appeals. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 11 & 13 days in filing