ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Charitable Trust 12-10-2017 6,00,000 8 Sri Ramakrishna Seva Samithi 06-03-2018 10,00,000 Sub Total 2,48,50,000 9 Sahrudaya Health, Medical & Educational Trust 30-04-2017 7,00,000 31-05-2017 8,00,000 Sub Total

A P E A AND O E W FUND TRUST,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

charitable or religious purposes. 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 of the income— ITA No.41/Hyd/2025 8 (a) income derived from property held under trust

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

trust or institution as are material for the purpose of 23 ITA.No.1128/Hyd./2024 achieving its objectives as mentioned in section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) (B) of the Act. However, in the present case, the Id. PCIT invoked the provisions of section 12AB(4)(a)(ii) of the Act as stood in the assessment year 2022-23. The objection

SRI AJEYA SANKARA TRUST,TIRUPATI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1366/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2025-26) Sri Ajeya Sankara Trust Vs. Cit (Exemption) Tirupati Hyderabad Pan:Aaxts2264F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate H. Srinivasulu राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr.Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated, 17/05/2025 Of Cit (Exemption) Whereby The Application Of The Assessee In Form 10Ab Seeking Regular Approval U/S 80G Of The Act Was Rejected On The Ground Of Barred By Limitation.

Section 80G of the Act is for benefit of the donors who donating money to the charitable trusts for claiming exemption in their returns of Income. Page 2 of 12 ITA No 1366 of 2025 Sri Ajeya Sankara Trust 10 Ld. CIT(E), Hyd, failed to examine the information filed by the assessee The assessee received donations

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Charitable Trust\n12-10-2017\n6,00,000\n8 Sri Ramakrishna Seva Samithi\n06-03-2018\n10,00,000\nSub Total\n2,48,50,000\n9 Sahrudaya Health, Medical & Educational Trust\n30-04-2017\n7,00,000\n31-05-2017\n8,00,000\nSub Total

UNNATHI LEISURE VENTURES PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 8(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.582/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Unnathi Leisure Ventures Vs. Dy. Cit (P) Ltd Hyderabad Circle 8(1) Pan: Aabcu7058C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A. Srinivas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Madan Mohan Meena, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 20/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 20/08/2024 आदेश/Order

60,611/- and also used the building for the purpose of business of the assessee. The Assessing Officer further called upon the assessee to file lease deed or any other document to prove the ownership of the building. In response, the assessee has filed copy of lease deed executed on 31.01.2019 and claimed that since the land belong to family

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

The appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.581/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2020-21) M/S. Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, Hyderabad. Pan:Aaalh0058D …..Appellant. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. …..Respondent. आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.568/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2020-21) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. …..Appellant. Vs. M/S. Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, Hyderabad. …..Respondent.

60,104/-. 3. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. AO, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Against the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A), both the assessee as well as the revenue have filed cross appeals before us. 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal

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

The appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.581/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2020-21) M/S. Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, Hyderabad. Pan:Aaalh0058D …..Appellant. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. …..Respondent. आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.568/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2020-21) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. …..Appellant. Vs. M/S. Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, Hyderabad. …..Respondent.

60,104/-. 3. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. AO, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Against the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A), both the assessee as well as the revenue have filed cross appeals before us. 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal

GOVARDHANA GIRISHWARA DEVASTHANAM TRUST,TIRUPATI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

60 days in its submission of the application for regular registration under section 12 AB of the Act is completely bona fide and the delay is neither wanton nor wiliful so the mechanical rejection of the Assessee's application by the Ld. Commissioner in completely unjustified. 6. The Ld. CIT (Exemptions) did not pay any heed to the principles

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

SEW FOUNDATION,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.499/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sew Foundation Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad (Exemptions), Ward 1(4) Pan:Aaats7433H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate V Siva Kumar राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Vinodh Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27/01/2025 Of The Learned Cit (A)/Addl/Jcit(A)-1 Coimbatore, For The A.Y.2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Learned Cit (A)/Addl/Jcit(A)-5 Coimbatore, 27-01-2025 Is Erroneous, Contrary To Law & Facts Of The Case.

charitable purpose nor set apart for future application in terms of section 11(1)(a) of the Act. The assessee challenged the action of the Assessing Officer before the learned CIT (A) and produced the relevant details as well as the donation receipts in support of the claim of the corpus donation to the tune of Rs.28

INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, TIRUPATI vs. SRI SRI SRI PARAMAPITHA SRI VENKAT RAMANACHARY GURUVU CHARITABLE TRUST, DHARMAVARAM

Bench: Us:

Charitable Trust, Dharmavaram, Andhra Pradesh. PAN : AACTP3275E (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ : Shri K. A. Sai Prasad, C.A. Assessee Represented by राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ : Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.DR Department Represented by सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ : 30.04.2025 Date of Conclusion of Hearing घोर्णध की तधरीख/ : 06.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R प्रनत रवीश सूद, जे

THE ICFAI SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2015-16 The Icfai Society, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. (Exemptions), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaajt0214B. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S. Ramarao, Advocate. (Appeared Through Virtual Mode) Revenue By: Smt. Th Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.07.2024 30.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement:

60 TAXMAN 248 wherein it was held as under : “We are aware of the fact that strictly speaking resjudicata does not apply to income-tax proceedings. Again, each assessment year being a unit, what is decided in one year may not apply in the following year but where a fundamental aspect permeating through the different assessment years has been found

SHARATH KUMAR REDDY SAREDDY,WANAPARTHY, MAHABUB NAGAR. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, MAHABUBNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1096/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2022-23) Shri Sharath Kumar Reddy Vs. Income Tax Officer Sareddy, Wanaparthy Ward – 1 Mahbubnagar Mahbubnagar Pan:Hpwps0712H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 20/08/2025 आदेश/Order

60,852/- against which the assessee claimed setting of loss from the game to the tune of Rs.2,01,37,400/- and thereby claimed a net loss of Rs.14,94,548/- from online gaming activities. The Assessing Officer denied the setting of the loss against the winning amount while passing the assessment order in view of the provisions of section

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

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

DAYSPRING ENTERPRISES OF INDIA,SECUNDERABAD vs. ITO., EXEMPTION WARD-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our observations given hereinabove

trust as per ITR filed for A.Ys. 2015-16 and 2016-17 and corrected calculation for the A.Ys. 2015-16 and 2016-17. The assessee further submitted that, by an inadvertent error, the accumulation of income @ 15% u/s 11(1)(a) has been taken at Rs.78,32,246/- instead of Rs.2,15,04,978/-, and because of this, the assessee