AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIZAMABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIZAMABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIZAMABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIZAMABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIZAMABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIZAMABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIZAMABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,SARANGAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

234B of the IT Act.” 5. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee’s application for granting registration u/s 12AA is pending before the DIT(E). Further, he submitted that, in the meanwhile, AO has adjudicated the issue, which was 4 I.T.A. Nos. 399 to 402/Hyd/19 Agricultural Market Committee, Sarangapur confirmed

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,SARANGAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

234B of the IT Act.” 5. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee’s application for granting registration u/s 12AA is pending before the DIT(E). Further, he submitted that, in the meanwhile, AO has adjudicated the issue, which was 4 I.T.A. Nos. 399 to 402/Hyd/19 Agricultural Market Committee, Sarangapur confirmed

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIRMAL

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

234B of the IT Act.” 5. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee’s application for granting registration u/s 12AA is pending before the DIT(E). Further, he submitted that, in the meanwhile, AO has adjudicated the issue, which was 4 I.T.A. Nos. 399 to 402/Hyd/19 Agricultural Market Committee, Sarangapur confirmed

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIRMAL

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

234B of the IT Act.” 5. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee’s application for granting registration u/s 12AA is pending before the DIT(E). Further, he submitted that, in the meanwhile, AO has adjudicated the issue, which was 4 I.T.A. Nos. 399 to 402/Hyd/19 Agricultural Market Committee, Sarangapur confirmed

ASST. DIRECTOR OF IT (EXEMP)-II,, HYDERABAD vs. ACTION FOR WELFARE AND AWAKENING IN RURAL ENVIRONMENT (AWARE), HYDERABAD

In the result, the C.O. filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.709/Hyd/2012 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:1995-96) Asst. Director Of Income Tax Vs. Action For Welfare & (Exemptions)-Ii, Awakening In Rural Hyderabad. Environment (Aware), Shantivanam, Nagarjuna Sagar Road, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaata2338R (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.138/Hyd/2012 (In आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.709/Hyd/2012) ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:1995-96) Asst. Director Of Income Tax Vs. Action For Welfare & (Exemptions)-Ii, Awakening In Rural Hyderabad. Environment (Aware), Pragati Bhavan, D.No.5-9- 24/78, Lake Hill Road, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad- 500463. Pan: Aaata2338R (Respondent/Cross Objector) (Appellant In Appeal) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "वारा/Revenue By:: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 08/01/2026 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pronouncement: 13/02/2026

charitable or religious purposes in India during the previous year such income so accumulated to set apart would not be included in the total income of the previous year provided the assessee filed an application before the Assessing Officer for being set apart for investment in future. (b) It clearly indicates that the appellant's income should have been exempted

TELANGANA WORKING JOURNALISTS WELFARE FUND,HYDERABAD vs. ITO,(EXEMPTIONS),WARD-3, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2020-21 Telangana Working Vs. Ito(Exemptions), Ward-3 Journalists Welfare Fund Aaykar Bhawan 5-9-166, Chappel Road L.B.Stadium Road Nampally Hyderabad-500 004 Hyderabad Telangana-500 001

charitable or religious trust constitute income. The voluntary contributions to the corpus become exempt only by virtue of operation of section 11 (1 ) (d) which is again reproduced below: 11. (1) Subject to the provisions of sections 60 to 63, the following income shall not be included in the total income of the previous year of the person in receipt

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

234B Rs. 10835863 Add: Interest u/s 234C Rs. 0 Total tax + Int payable Rs. 45641967 Less: Self tax paid Rs. Less: Regular by Rs. 29414128 adjustment of refund Balance Payable. Rs. 16227839 Madhucon Projects Limited, Hyderabad. 25. The assessee filed a rectification application on 17.04.2013. However, the said rectification application was dismissed by the Assessing Officer vide order dt.11.06.2013