← All Phrases

“appeal before the tribunal”

AppealsSection 253Section 25316,033 judgments

The decision most relied on for appeal before the tribunal is CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. (38 ITD 320), cited in 2,267 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on appeal before the tribunal

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT
223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court
2,040
citing judgments

A court or tribunal is not bound to answer a reference or adjudicate an appeal on its merits if the party at whose instance the proceeding is made fails to appear at the hearing or take necessary steps for its proper conduct.

CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders
349 ITR 336 · 2012 · High Court
956
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can entertain fresh claims or revised computations of income made by an assessee, even if these were not submitted through a revised return of income.

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT
389 ITR 326 · 2016 · High Court
241
citing judgments

An appellate authority can admit and adjudicate additional grounds of appeal if they are legal in nature or go to the root of the matter, even if not raised before lower authorities or filed belatedly.

Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar
1 SCC 591 · 1985 · Reported
225
citing judgments

The appellate tribunal must render a proper decision on both facts and law, disposing of an appeal on its merits rather than dismissing it solely due to the appellant's absence. This obligation is derived from Section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922, and reflects principles of natural justice.

Otters Club v. DIT
392 ITR 244 · 2017 · High Court
202
citing judgments

The Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days.

CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co Ltd.
81 ITR 303 · 1971 · High Court
202
citing judgments

Income received by an assessee for services rendered to an Indian company may not be taxable, particularly when the Revenue does not contest its non-taxability. This principle aligns with CBDT Circular No. 14 of 1955, which has been approved by the Supreme Court.

Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT
317 ITR 433 · 2009 · High Court
202
citing judgments

Orders that are inordinately delayed are liable to be recalled and heard afresh, and the Appellate Tribunal President should frame guidelines for timely disposal of appeals.

Judgments citing appeal before the tribunal

Peruvemba Sahakarana Urban Credit Society, Pruvemba vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Palakkad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 366/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin18 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoperuvemba Sahakarana Urban The Income Tax Officer-2 Credit Society Aayakar Bhavan Peruvemba P.O. Vs. English Church Road Palakkad 678531 Palakkad 678014 [Pan: Aaeap1940M] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ------- Nome -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

filed before the CIT(A) who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The solitary issue that arises in both the appeals is where the lower authorities were justified in denying deduction

Pondicherry Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporare Ward-5(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1753/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1753/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Pondicherry Agro Foods P Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.1B, 1St Floor, Arihant Jashn, Vs. Corporate Ward -5(2), Rukmani Lakshmipathy Salai, Chennai. 38 (Old 121), Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Pan: Aaacp 4418N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Anandd Babunath, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit

For Appellant: Shri Anandd Babunath, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 250Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(ii)

assessee stands dismissed.” 6. Aggrieved by the above order of the Additional / Joint Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a paper-book enclosing therein the CBDT Notification No.35/2008 dated 14.03.2008 (granting approval to HHBHRF), the CBDT Notification No.79/2016 dated

Vag Infotech, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-53(1), New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3572/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumara.Yr. : 2013-14 Vag Infotech, Vs. Acit, Circle 53(1), D-42, South Extension Part-I, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 049 (Pan: Aaafv2681C) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 234ASection 45Section 50C

Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. At the outset, it is noticed that there is a delay of 44 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The reasons for delay has been pointed out that notices were not received by the assessee, hence, it is prayed that delay

Talha Khan, Mohalla Afganan Po Amroha vs. Addl.Jt.Dy.ACIT.NFAC, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3419/DEL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumara.Yr. : 2017-18 Talha Khan, Vs. National Faceless Mohalla Afganan Po Amroha, Appeal Centre (Nfac), Amroha-244221 Delhi Uttar Pradesh (Pan: Ejspk7379K) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Vibhu Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 271FSection 69A

place of business income. 2. At the outset, it is noticed that there is a delay of 71 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The reasonable cause for the same has been attributed that assessee is not well versed with the tax laws and proceedings, hence

Rajendra Pratap Yadav, Lucknow vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), NFAC

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

ITA 614/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow14 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Rajendra Pratap Yadav V. The Cit(A) 21/202, Indira Nagar Nfac Lucknow Tan/Pan:Acmpy9678E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 12 11 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 14 11 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 271ASection 69A

your good self may deem fit. 6. A perusal of record shows that there is a delay of 20 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee had filed an application dated 03.10.2024 for condonation of delay, duly supported by an Affidavit and Medical Certificate, stating therein that

Karan Singh, Unnao vs. ITO-2(4), Unnao

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 494/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow14 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Karan Singh V. Ito-2(4) 496, Hiran Nagar Unnao _ New Unnao, Uttar Pradesh Tan/Pan:Aqwpls6478L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vinay Kumar Tiwari, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 08 10 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 14 11 2024 O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 18.09.2020, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-01, Lucknow (Ld. Cit(A) For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had E- Filed His Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.4,47,580/-. Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass For The Reason That The Assessee Had Deposited Rs.10,00,000/- In Old Sbns (Specified Bank Notes) On 15.11.2016 In His Bank Account No.010010100010068 With Aryavart Bank. Accordingly, The Ao Issued Notice Under Section 142(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’), Along With A Questionnaire.

For Appellant: Shri Vinay Kumar Tiwari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 271ASection 69A

appeal with permission. 3. The Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that there was a delay of 1350 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. He submitted that the assessee had filed an application dated 09.08.2024 for condonation of delay, duly supported by an Affidavit, Medical Certificate

Soyabmahmed Vahora L/H of Late Shirajbhai Abdulkarimbhai Vahora, Anand vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Anand

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 779/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 6. Aggrieved, the Assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. During the hearing, it was submitted by the ld. Counsel that the assesse is doing business in tobacco merchant he sold his product

Soyabmahmed Vahora L/H of Late Shirajbhai Abdulkarimbhai Vahora, Anand vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Anand

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 778/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 6. Aggrieved, the Assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. During the hearing, it was submitted by the ld. Counsel that the assesse is doing business in tobacco merchant he sold his product

Soyabmahmed Vahora L/H of Late Shirajbhai Abdulkarimbhai Vahora, Anand vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Anand

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 777/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 6. Aggrieved, the Assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. During the hearing, it was submitted by the ld. Counsel that the assesse is doing business in tobacco merchant he sold his product

Shri Shwetamber Uardhman Jainseva Sangh, Aurangabad vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 1955/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Nov 2024

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1955/Pun/2024

For Appellant: Ms. Diksha AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

carried out other than religious activities, thereby cancelling the provisional registration granted to it on 25.05.2022. 4. Aggrieved assessee trust preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 5. At the outset, Ld. Authorised Representative for the assessee submitted that assessee could not plead properly before ld.CIT(E) and also failed to file

Ashok Kumar Kolla, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 876/HYD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G. & आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.876/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Ashok Kumar Kolla Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 6(1) Pan:Afwpk8481L Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V.Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri K.N. Suresh Babu, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri K.N. Suresh Babu, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Ashok Kumar Kolla 4. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that, the learned CIT (A) erred in upholding the reopening of the assessment

Aurora Educational Society, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 476/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.394 & 395/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Church Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaalc0017F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.476 & 393/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Aurora Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaata8751C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.475 & 392/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Karshak Vidya Parishad, Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaatk5390B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna,Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2024

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna,DR
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

earnings on the ground of loss of tax exemption. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the delay in filing of the appeal is due to some unforeseen reasons

Karshak Vidya Parishad, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 475/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.394 & 395/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Church Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaalc0017F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.476 & 393/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Aurora Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaata8751C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.475 & 392/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Karshak Vidya Parishad, Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaatk5390B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna,Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2024

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna,DR
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

earnings on the ground of loss of tax exemption. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the delay in filing of the appeal is due to some unforeseen reasons

Church Educational Society, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 395/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.394 & 395/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Church Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaalc0017F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.476 & 393/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Aurora Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaata8751C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.475 & 392/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Karshak Vidya Parishad, Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaatk5390B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna,Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2024

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna,DR
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

earnings on the ground of loss of tax exemption. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the delay in filing of the appeal is due to some unforeseen reasons

Church Educational Society, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 394/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.394 & 395/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Church Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaalc0017F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.476 & 393/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Aurora Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaata8751C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.475 & 392/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Karshak Vidya Parishad, Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaatk5390B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna,Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2024

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna,DR
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

earnings on the ground of loss of tax exemption. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the delay in filing of the appeal is due to some unforeseen reasons

Aurora Educational Society, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 393/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.394 & 395/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Church Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaalc0017F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.476 & 393/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Aurora Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaata8751C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.475 & 392/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Karshak Vidya Parishad, Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaatk5390B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna,Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2024

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna,DR
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

earnings on the ground of loss of tax exemption. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the delay in filing of the appeal is due to some unforeseen reasons

Karshak Vidya Parishad, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 392/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.394 & 395/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Church Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaalc0017F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.476 & 393/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Aurora Educational Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaata8751C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.475 & 392/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Karshak Vidya Parishad, Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaatk5390B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna,Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2024

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna,DR
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

earnings on the ground of loss of tax exemption. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the delay in filing of the appeal is due to some unforeseen reasons

ACIT, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Incredible India Projects Private Limited, Secunderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19 are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 604/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.604 & 605/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Acit Vs. Incredible India Projects Central Circle-2(4) Private Limited Hyderabad Secunderabad [Pan : Aabci9355A] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Sandeep Goel, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri B.Bala Krishna, Cit, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of 19/09/2024 Hearing: घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2024 आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Separate, But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Learned Cit(A)]-12, Hyderabad, Both Dated 30/08/2022, Pertaining To A.Y.2017-18 & 2018-19. Since The Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Goel, ARFor Respondent: : Shri B.Bala Krishna, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 270ASection 270A(2)Section 270A(9)(d)Section 271ASection 274

Assessing Officer u/s 271AAB of the Act for the A.Y.2018-19. 7. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. Learned Counsel for the assessee referring to application filed under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, 1963 for both the assessment years submitted that ... also considered very similar issue and held that Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, 1963 gives a right to the respondent in an appeal before the Tribunal to support the order appealed against on any of the grounds decided against him, even though he may not have appealed against the order

Sainath Traders, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-6(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is dismissed

ITA 1747/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1747/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2017-18 Sainath Traders, Income Tax Officer, No.963/7, Cresent Court, Non-Corporate Ward-6(2), Ground Floor, E.V.R. Periyar Road, Chennai Chennai-600 084. [Pan: Acxfs6266R] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.Girish Kumar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms.Gouthami Manivasam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.11.2024

For Appellant: Shri S.Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasam, JCIT
Section 250

NFAC, Delhi. :- 2 -: It has been noted that there is a delay of 73 days in the case, in 2.0 filing of this appeal before the tribunal. In its affidavit the assesse has pleaded that the managing partner of the assesse firm is residing overseas in UAE for the purposes

No. 3324 Nerinjipettai Primary Agri Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Erode vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(5), Erode

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

ITA 1497/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1497/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2017-18 No.3324 Nerinjipetai Primary Agri Income Tax Officer, Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Ward-2(5), Nerinjipettai Post, Anthiyur Taluk, Erode. Erode. [Pan: Aaban4821G] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Ms.A.Vijayalakshmi, C.A, Tirupur. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Dr.Samuel Pitta, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.11.2024

For Appellant: Ms.A.Vijayalakshmi, C.A, TirupurFor Respondent: Shri Dr.Samuel Pitta, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 250

been noted that there is a delay of 14 days in the case, in filing of this appeal before the tribunal. In its affidavit the assesse has pleaded that the assesse is a Primary Agricultural Society and that the secretary of the society was preoccupied with the finalization