← 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

Shalini Srivastava, Haldwani vs. Ward 2(1)(1) Haldwani/, Haldwani

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 121/DDN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun24 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] [Assessment Year :2019-20] Shalini Srivastava Vs Ward-2(1)(1) Sheeshmahal, Opp. Haldwani Filter House, Uttarakhand Kathgodam, Haldwani, Uttarakhand-263139 Pan-Apyps8567D Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Prashant Kackar, Ca Revenue By Shri Amar Pal Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.07.2025 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Nfac/2018-19/10096852 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 28.09.2021 Passed U/S 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Filed Her Return Of Income, Declaring Income From House Property Of Inr 51,754/- & Income Under The Head “Other Sources” Of Inr 17,56,736/-. The Total Income Of Inr 18,08,490/- Was Claimed As Set Off Against The Current Year Losses From Business & Profession Of Inr 31,04,998/- & Thus Total Income At Inr Nil Was Declared After Claiming Of Deduction Under Chapter Via Of Inr 1,56,918/-. The Return Of Income Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny. Notices U/S 143(2) Followed By Notices U/S 142(1) Were Issued From Time To Time Which Were Not Complied With. In Absence Of Any Reply By The Assessee, Order Was Passed U/S 144 As Per Information Available & Total Income Of The Assessee Was Assessed At Inr 13,32,38,065/- By Making Various Addition.

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 68

vide order dated 08.07.2025, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:- 1. “On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Commissioner of Income

Hasmukh Ramanlal Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(2)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 745/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year : 2017-18 Hasmukh Ramanlal Patel The Ito, C/O. M/S.Bhikhalal Ramanlal Patel Vs Ward-3(2)(2) Nr.Borring, St Road Ahmedabad. Sanand Pan:Abcpp 2170 K (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Divatia, Ar : Revenue By Shri Ravindra, Ld.Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24 /12/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, AR
Section 250

days. A separate application has been filed for condonation of delay. Considering the averments made in the application, the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal is condoned. 2 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had deposited an amount of Rs.15,26,000/- during

Raghu Alekh Barli, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

Accordingly we have set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and quashed the impugned assessment order. Following the same reasoning, all these three appeals filed by the assessee are also allowed in ...

ITA 915/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaappeal In Ita Assessee Revenue A.Y 1317/Hyd/2025 Smt. Lingamgunta Income Tax Officer 2015-16 Adilaxmi, Secunderabad Ward 10 (1) Pan:Amnpl4940M Hyderabad 915/Hyd/2025 Shri Raghu Alekh Barli Dy. Cit 2018-19 Hyderabad Circle 6(1) Pan:Ahjpa1085F Hyderabad 1487/Hyd/2025 Sanzyme Private Ltd Dy. Cit 2019-20 Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaacu2692R Hyderabad 1606/Hyd/2025 Shri Bikaram Income Tax Officer 2018-19 Pushpender, Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan: Cebpp4471F Hyderabad िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao & Sashank Dundu & C.A. Kumar Pal Tated राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rahman, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao &For Respondent: : Shri Waseem UR Rahman, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

common consolidated order. ITA No.1317/Hyd/2025: 2. At the outset, we observed that there is a delay of 21 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a condonation petition accompanied by a copy of affidavit explaining the reasons which led to the delay in filing ... submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was passed on 27.05.2025. Accordingly, the assessee was required to file the appeal before this Tribunal on or before 31.07.2025. However, the appeal was filed on 21.08.2025, resulting in a delay of 21 days. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee

Penchalaiah Dasari, Nellore vs. ITO., Ward-1, Nellore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 703/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri M V Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kritika Jaiswal, SR-AR
Section 142(1)Section 145Section 37

partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 6. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The learned counsel for the assessee Shri M. V. Prasad, CA submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the additions made

Raja Reddy Nalla, Warangal vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed for both the assessment years

ITA 550/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.549 & 550/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2013-14 & 2014-15) Shri Raja Reddy Nalla, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. Warangal. Pan : Aaxpn3602Q (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Poorna Chander Rao, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/12/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025

For Appellant: Shri Poorna Chander Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 153ASection 154Section 69

assessee and upheld the tax computed by the A.O. 6. Aggrieved by the Ld. CIT(A) order, the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri Poorna Chander Rao, C.A. submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the tax computed

Raja Reddy Nalla, Warangal vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed for both the assessment years

ITA 549/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.549 & 550/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2013-14 & 2014-15) Shri Raja Reddy Nalla, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. Warangal. Pan : Aaxpn3602Q (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Poorna Chander Rao, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/12/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025

For Appellant: Shri Poorna Chander Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 153ASection 154Section 69

assessee and upheld the tax computed by the A.O. 6. Aggrieved by the Ld. CIT(A) order, the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri Poorna Chander Rao, C.A. submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the tax computed

Bikaram Pushpender, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

Accordingly we have set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and quashed the impugned assessment order. Following the same reasoning, all these three appeals filed by the assessee are also allowed in ...

ITA 1606/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaappeal In Ita Assessee Revenue A.Y 1317/Hyd/2025 Smt. Lingamgunta Income Tax Officer 2015-16 Adilaxmi, Secunderabad Ward 10 (1) Pan:Amnpl4940M Hyderabad 915/Hyd/2025 Shri Raghu Alekh Barli Dy. Cit 2018-19 Hyderabad Circle 6(1) Pan:Ahjpa1085F Hyderabad 1487/Hyd/2025 Sanzyme Private Ltd Dy. Cit 2019-20 Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaacu2692R Hyderabad 1606/Hyd/2025 Shri Bikaram Income Tax Officer 2018-19 Pushpender, Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan: Cebpp4471F Hyderabad िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao & Sashank Dundu & C.A. Kumar Pal Tated राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rahman, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao &For Respondent: : Shri Waseem UR Rahman, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

common consolidated order. ITA No.1317/Hyd/2025: 2. At the outset, we observed that there is a delay of 21 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a condonation petition accompanied by a copy of affidavit explaining the reasons which led to the delay in filing ... submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was passed on 27.05.2025. Accordingly, the assessee was required to file the appeal before this Tribunal on or before 31.07.2025. However, the appeal was filed on 21.08.2025, resulting in a delay of 21 days. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee

Sanzyme Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

Accordingly we have set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and quashed the impugned assessment order. Following the same reasoning, all these three appeals filed by the assessee are also allowed in ...

ITA 1487/HYD/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaappeal In Ita Assessee Revenue A.Y 1317/Hyd/2025 Smt. Lingamgunta Income Tax Officer 2015-16 Adilaxmi, Secunderabad Ward 10 (1) Pan:Amnpl4940M Hyderabad 915/Hyd/2025 Shri Raghu Alekh Barli Dy. Cit 2018-19 Hyderabad Circle 6(1) Pan:Ahjpa1085F Hyderabad 1487/Hyd/2025 Sanzyme Private Ltd Dy. Cit 2019-20 Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaacu2692R Hyderabad 1606/Hyd/2025 Shri Bikaram Income Tax Officer 2018-19 Pushpender, Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan: Cebpp4471F Hyderabad िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao & Sashank Dundu & C.A. Kumar Pal Tated राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rahman, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao &For Respondent: : Shri Waseem UR Rahman, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

common consolidated order. ITA No.1317/Hyd/2025: 2. At the outset, we observed that there is a delay of 21 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a condonation petition accompanied by a copy of affidavit explaining the reasons which led to the delay in filing ... submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was passed on 27.05.2025. Accordingly, the assessee was required to file the appeal before this Tribunal on or before 31.07.2025. However, the appeal was filed on 21.08.2025, resulting in a delay of 21 days. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee

Nitin Bhatia, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-12(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1472/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1472/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Nitin Bhatia Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 12 (1) Pan:Akqpb1898R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Y.V Bhanu Narayan Rao राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: CA Y.V Bhanu Narayan RaoFor Respondent: : Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54(1)Section 54(2)

upheld the addition made by the Ld. AO. 5. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. At the outset, the Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that the solitary issue out of the grounds of appeal of the assessee

Srikanth Kakati, Kothagudem vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Kothagudem

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1341/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1341/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2018-2019 Srikanth Kakati, The Income Tax Officer, Kothagudem–507 Ward-1, Vs. 101. Khammam. Kothagudem. Telangana. Pin –507 101. Pan Csupk1347N Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ms Ml Niharika, Advocate राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms Kritika Jaiswal, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24.12.2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: MS ML Niharika, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS Kritika Jaiswal, Sr. AR
Section 144BSection 148Section 69Section 69A

Delhi, for the assessment year 2018-2019. 2 ITA.No.1341/Hyd./2025 2. There is a delay of 25 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition/ affidavit for explaining the cause of delay of 25 days in filing the present appeal ... partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 10. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee filed present appeal before the Tribunal. 11. The learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee at the very outset, has invited the attention of the Bench to the additional ground raised

Lingamgunta Adilaxmi, Secunderabad vs. ITO., Ward-10(1), Hyderabad

Accordingly we have set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and quashed the impugned assessment order. Following the same reasoning, all these three appeals filed by the assessee are also allowed in ...

ITA 1317/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaappeal In Ita Assessee Revenue A.Y 1317/Hyd/2025 Smt. Lingamgunta Income Tax Officer 2015-16 Adilaxmi, Secunderabad Ward 10 (1) Pan:Amnpl4940M Hyderabad 915/Hyd/2025 Shri Raghu Alekh Barli Dy. Cit 2018-19 Hyderabad Circle 6(1) Pan:Ahjpa1085F Hyderabad 1487/Hyd/2025 Sanzyme Private Ltd Dy. Cit 2019-20 Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaacu2692R Hyderabad 1606/Hyd/2025 Shri Bikaram Income Tax Officer 2018-19 Pushpender, Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan: Cebpp4471F Hyderabad िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao & Sashank Dundu & C.A. Kumar Pal Tated राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rahman, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao &For Respondent: : Shri Waseem UR Rahman, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

common consolidated order. ITA No.1317/Hyd/2025: 2. At the outset, we observed that there is a delay of 21 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a condonation petition accompanied by a copy of affidavit explaining the reasons which led to the delay in filing ... submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was passed on 27.05.2025. Accordingly, the assessee was required to file the appeal before this Tribunal on or before 31.07.2025. However, the appeal was filed on 21.08.2025, resulting in a delay of 21 days. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee

Sree Lakshmi Gayatri Hospitals Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1046/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1046/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2018-2019 Sree Lakshmi Gayatri Hospitals Private The Dcit, Circle-3(1), Vs. Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pin–500 082. Telangana. Pan Aapcs9547L (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24.12.2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 68

Delhi, for the assessment year 2018-2019. 2 ITA.No.1046/Hyd./2025 2. There is a delay of 19 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition for the condonation of delay which is supported by the affidavit of the Managing Director ... assessee company was suffering from severe viral fever from 20.05.2025 to 16.06.2025 and, therefore, could not take necessary steps in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal within the period of limitation. The learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has further submitted that the delay in filing the appeal

DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Light House Movie Makers LLP, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 319/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.297/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2015-16) Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) Shri Atchi Reddy Kovvuri, Hyderabad Pan: Adopk6018R (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.318 & 319/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21) Vs. M/S. Light House Movie Makers Llp, Hyderabad. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) Pan: Aagfl8979H (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessees By: राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A. Smt. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr 18/11/2025 24/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha G, A.М. : These Appeals Are Filed By Revenue Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad, All Dated 19.11.2024 For The

Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 153C

allowed. 7. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A) order, the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The Learned Department Representative Smt. U Mini Chandra, CIT-DR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in quashing the notice issued u/s.153C of the Act and consequent assessment order

DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Light House Movie Makers LLP, Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 318/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.297/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2015-16) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Shri Atchi Reddy Kovvuri, Vs. Hyderabad Tax, Pan : Adopk6018R Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.318 & 319/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21) Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Light House Movie Makers Vs. Llp, Hyderabad. Tax, Pan : Aagfl8979H Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessees By: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Smt. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha G, A.M. : These Appeals Are Filed By Revenue Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad, All Dated 19.11.2024 For The

For Respondent: Smt. U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 153C

Nos.297, 318 & 319/Hyd/2024 14 ITA Nos.297, 318 & 319/Hyd/2024 15 7. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A) order, the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The Learned Department Representative Smt. U Mini Chandra, CIT-DR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in quashing the notice issued

DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Atchi Reddy Kovuuri, Hhyderabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 297/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.297/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2015-16) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Shri Atchi Reddy Kovvuri, Vs. Hyderabad Tax, Pan : Adopk6018R Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.318 & 319/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21) Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Light House Movie Makers Vs. Llp, Hyderabad. Tax, Pan : Aagfl8979H Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessees By: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Smt. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha G, A.M. : These Appeals Are Filed By Revenue Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad, All Dated 19.11.2024 For The

For Respondent: Smt. U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 153C

Nos.297, 318 & 319/Hyd/2024 14 ITA Nos.297, 318 & 319/Hyd/2024 15 7. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A) order, the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The Learned Department Representative Smt. U Mini Chandra, CIT-DR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in quashing the notice issued

Amarjit Kaur Ranjit Singh Anand, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 24(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4377/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Mr. Pratik JainFor Respondent: 30/09/2025
Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

provisions of the perused the material placed on record. Under the pro perused the material placed on record. Under the pro Act, an appeal before the Tribunal is required to be filed within sixty Act, an appeal before the Tribunal is required to be filed within sixty Act, an appeal

Atishay Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO Ward 3(4), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5714/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68

vide order dated 22.08.2025, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:- 1. “The appeal order dt. 22.08.2025 u/s 250 is bad in law. 2. On the peculiar facts

Mall Hotel Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5064/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

into the order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising following grounds: “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals (hereinafter referred

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-I Noida, Noida vs. M/S Rudra Buildwell Homes Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal taken by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4119/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwaldy. Cit, M/S Rudra Buildwell Homes Central Circle-I, Private Limited, Noida-201301, Vs. D-53, Okhla, Phase-1, Uttar Pradesh. Delhi-110020. Pan-Aafcr6959P (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Cit, M/S Rudra Buildwell Projects Central Circle-I, Private Limited, Noida-201301, Vs. D-53, Okhla, Phase-1, Uttar Pradesh. Delhi-110020. Pan-Aaecr9589E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

addition could be made. DCIT vs. M/s Rudra Buildwell Homes Private Limited & Ors. 6. Aggrieved by the said order, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal: “1. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case

Punch Ratna Fasteners Private Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 19(1), Delhi

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

ITA 4066/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Punch Ratna Fasters Vs Acit Pvt.Ltd., 4/8 Third Floor, Circle-19(1) East Punjabi Bagh, Delhi Delhi-110026. Pan-Aaacp1316M Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Naveen Gupta, Adv. & Shri Nakul Gupta, Adv. Respondent By Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.05.2025 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), Meerut [“Ld.Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. 288/2013-14 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 17.02.2021 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 143(3A) & 143(3B) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Cold & Hot Forged Automotive Components & Fasteners & Had Filed Its Return Of Income On 28.10.2018, Declaring Total Income Of Inr 28,88,88,610/-. Subsequently, The Said Return Of Income Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny Under Cass For The Issues Namely, (I) Expenditure Of Personal Nature & (Ii) Foreign Financial Interest. Subsequently, Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Served Upon The Assessee On 22.09.2019. Thereafter, Notices U/S 142(1) Of The Income-Tax Act 1961 Were Issued, In Response To Which, The Assessee Submitted Copies Of Relevant Documents & Explanations Online Through E- Filing Portal. After Considering The Submissions Made By The Assessee & All Relevant Materials Available On Record, Income Of The Assessee Was Assessed At Inr 29,16,01,890/- Vide Assessment Order Dated 17.02.2021 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act.

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37

vide order dated 16.05.2025, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:- 1. “That the order of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) is against law and facts. 2. That