HYDERABAD SCIENCE SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1128/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2015-2016 Hyderabad Science Society, Hyderabad. The Dcit, Vs. Pin - 500 028. Exemption Circle-1(1), Telangana. Hyderabad. Pan Aaath3789F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca For Revenue : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2026 आदेश/Order

254 of the Act, to the ITAT order dt. 26.10.2022 on assessment, within the limitation of time i.e, on or before 31.03.2024. 9.1. The assessment is barred by limitation on 31.03.2024 itself as the AO has not passed any consequential order. Assessment order, if any passed now for the year would be beyond jurisdiction

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

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

Charitable Trust [2011] 13 taxmann.com 50 (Hyderabad), wherein it was held that "it was not open to Tribunal to entertain second application which was filed on same set of facts and to recall its appellate order on alleged premise that there was an error apparent in order of Tribunal". Madhucon Projects Limited, Hyderabad. 4. Reliance is also placed

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

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

Charitable Trust [2011] 13 taxmann.com 50 (Hyderabad), wherein it was held that "it was not open to Tribunal to entertain second application which was filed on same set of facts and to recall its appellate order on alleged premise that there was an error apparent in order of Tribunal". Madhucon Projects Limited, Hyderabad. 4. Reliance is also placed

MADHUCON PROJECTS LTD, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYD, HYDERABAD

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

Charitable Trust [2011] 13 taxmann.com 50 (Hyderabad), wherein it was held that "it was not open to Tribunal to entertain second application which was filed on same set of facts and to recall its appellate order on alleged premise that there was an error apparent in order of Tribunal". Madhucon Projects Limited, Hyderabad. 4. Reliance is also placed

KAKINADA INFRASTRUCTURE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

Charitable Trust cited supra, there was no hard and fast\nrule can be laid down in the matter of condonation of delay and courts\nshould adopt a pragmatic approach and the courts should exercise\ntheir discretion on the facts of the each case keeping in mind that in\nconstruing, the expression \"sufficient cause" the principle of advancing\nsubstantial justice

MADHUSUDHAN JAJU,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SANGAREDDY

In the result, the C.O. of the Revenue is allowed for statistical\npurposes

254 days, for\nwhich they have filed one combined condonation petition in the form\nof Affidavit.\nLearned Department Representative (“Ld. DR\")\nsubmitted that, during the relevant period of delay of the C.O., there\nwas transfer of the Ld. AO, nomination of the Ld. AO for election\nduty and there were time barring assessment, penalty cases, reopening\nof assessment

WISDOM WINGS CHARITABLE TRUST,ATMAKUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes as indicated herein above

Trust. Before us, the\nassessee has filed certain information in the form of Paper Book in\nsupport of the assessee's plea for registration U/s.12AB of the Act and on\na perusal of the same, we find that the same constitutes additional\nevidence which may go to the root of the matter.\n\n8. Section 254 of the Act read

WISDOM WINGS CHARITABLE TRUST,ATMAKUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes as indicated herein above

Trust. Before us, the\nassessee has filed certain information in the form of Paper Book in\nsupport of the assessee's plea for registration U/s.12AB of the Act and on\na perusal of the same, we find that the same constitutes additional\nevidence which may go to the root of the matter.\n8. Section 254 of the Act read with

DEVGEN SEEDS AND CROP TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED, SECUNDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-17(1) HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

charitable trust was upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court (see paragraph 13 at page 177). The Appellant urges that based on the correct factual position it shall be open to the Tribunal to take a different view. In this regard, your attention is also invited to the following observations of Mr P N Bhagwari in the case of Distributor

DEVGEM SEEDS AND CROP TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

charitable trust was upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court (see paragraph 13 at page 177). The Appellant urges that based on the correct factual position it shall be open to the Tribunal to take a different view. In this regard, your attention is also invited to the following observations of Mr P N Bhagwari in the case of Distributor

DCIT, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE, HYDERABAD vs. HYDERABAD METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

charitable purpose and seeking exemption under Section 10(23C) or other provisions of the Act.” 15. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the clarification issued vide order dt.03.11.2022 in Paras 4 and 5 has held as under : “4. A plain reading of the conclusions recorded in Para 253(A), (B), (C), (D) and (E) would disclose that this court

HYDERABAD METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

charitable purpose and seeking exemption under Section 10(23C) or other provisions of the Act.” 15. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the clarification issued vide order dt.03.11.2022 in Paras 4 and 5 has held as under : “4. A plain reading of the conclusions recorded in Para 253(A), (B), (C), (D) and (E) would disclose that this court

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, WARANGAL

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

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

charitable purpose and seeking exemption under Section 10(23C) or other provisions of the Act.” 15. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the clarification issued vide order dt.03.11.2022 in Paras 4 and 5 has held as under : “4. A plain reading of the conclusions recorded in Para 253(A), (B), (C), (D) and (E) would disclose that this court

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

charitable purpose and seeking exemption under Section 10(23C) or other provisions of the Act.” 15. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the clarification issued vide order dt.03.11.2022 in Paras 4 and 5 has held as under : “4. A plain reading of the conclusions recorded in Para 253(A), (B), (C), (D) and (E) would disclose that this court

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

charitable purpose and seeking exemption under Section 10(23C) or other provisions of the Act.” 15. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the clarification issued vide order dt.03.11.2022 in Paras 4 and 5 has held as under : “4. A plain reading of the conclusions recorded in Para 253(A), (B), (C), (D) and (E) would disclose that this court

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

charitable purpose and seeking exemption under Section 10(23C) or other provisions of the Act.” 15. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the clarification issued vide order dt.03.11.2022 in Paras 4 and 5 has held as under : “4. A plain reading of the conclusions recorded in Para 253(A), (B), (C), (D) and (E) would disclose that this court

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

charitable purpose and seeking exemption under Section 10(23C) or other provisions of the Act.” 15. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the clarification issued vide order dt.03.11.2022 in Paras 4 and 5 has held as under : “4. A plain reading of the conclusions recorded in Para 253(A), (B), (C), (D) and (E) would disclose that this court

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

charitable purpose and seeking exemption under Section 10(23C) or other provisions of the Act.” 15. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the clarification issued vide order dt.03.11.2022 in Paras 4 and 5 has held as under : “4. A plain reading of the conclusions recorded in Para 253(A), (B), (C), (D) and (E) would disclose that this court

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , WARANGAL

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

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

charitable purpose and seeking exemption under Section 10(23C) or other provisions of the Act.” 15. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the clarification issued vide order dt.03.11.2022 in Paras 4 and 5 has held as under : “4. A plain reading of the conclusions recorded in Para 253(A), (B), (C), (D) and (E) would disclose that this court