AASHRITHA THE DR U SANKARANARAYANA RAJU CHARITABLE TRUST,HYDERABAD vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 208 & 209/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2022-23 & 2025-26) Aashritha The Dr U Vs. Cit (Exemptions) Sankaranarayana Raju Hyderabad Charitable Trust, Hyderabad Pan:Aacta3113G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.S.Rajendra Kumar, Irs (Retired) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Narender Kumar Naik, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao

section code instead of renewal of the resignation u/s 12AB and approval u/s 80G(5), a provisional registration and approval was Page 5 of 13 ITA Nos 208 and 209 of 2025 Ashritha The Dr U Sankaranarayana Raju Charitable Trust granted. Thus, the learned AR has submitted that the application filed by the assessee ought to have been considered

WE ARE WITH YOU CHARITABLE TRUST,ADDANKI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

iii) to first proviso to section 80G(5) cannot be excluded and or it has not been the intention of the CBDT while issuing the circular. There cannot be a distinction within the same provision without bringing out any exception and even this provision is for the benefit of the donors who are donating money to the charitable trusts

YUG NIRMAN YOJANA GAYATRI PARIWAR TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. 2. The CIT (Exemption) has ignored the objective and activities of the society towards charitable objects and ignoring the fact that the provisional registration under Clause (iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G has been granted to the appellant society which is arbitrary and uncalled

PENNAM FOUNDATION,HYDERABAD vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee trust in ITA

Bench: Us:

charitable in nature, which entitles it to registration under Section 80G. 5. That the rejection of the application is based on surmises and conjectures, rather than being supported by any concrete evidence that indicates non-compliance or misuse of the provisions. 2. Succinctly stated, the assessee trust was granted provisional registration under Clause (iv) of the “first proviso

SEVAGRAMAM CHARITABLE TRUST,HYDERABAD vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

iii). that the CIT(Exemption) had not drawn any adverse findings on the merits or documents filed by the assessee trust; and (iv). that the CIT (Exemption) has failed to exercise the discretion vested with him under the proviso to Section 12A(1)(ac) for condoning the delay involved in the application filed by the assessee trust. 7. We have

SEVAGRAMAM CHARITABLE TRUST,HYDERABAD vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

iii). that the CIT(Exemption) had not drawn any adverse findings on the merits or documents filed by the assessee trust; and (iv). that the CIT (Exemption) has failed to exercise the discretion vested with him under the proviso to Section 12A(1)(ac) for condoning the delay involved in the application filed by the assessee trust. 7. We have

SRI VIDYA SARASWATHI PRASADA VITHRANA SOCIETY, WARGAL,MEDAK DIST. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahassessment Year: N/A Sri Vidya Saraswathi Vs. The Commissioner Of Prasada Vitharana Society, Income Tax (Exemptions) Wargal, Medak District. Hyderabad. Pan- Aagas9224B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.K. Gupta Revenue By : Shri K. Srinivas Reddy

iii) The applicant did not give reply to the queries as per Question No.5 and 8 of the notice dated 29.12.15. 6. We find that all the three grounds on which the CIT (E) have denied registration are unsustainable as it is very clear from the documents filed by the assessee that the assessee has mentioned the activities carried

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

iii) disallowance of the claim of deduction of the assessee company under Section 801A of the Act: Rs. 24,35,05,411/-; and (iv) addition under section 68 in respect of alleged bogus transactions with M/s. Lakshin Infradev Pvt. Ltd: Rs. 1,29,91,000/-, determined he income of the assessee company vide his order passed under section

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Sood(Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1083/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Vs. Penna Cement Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcp2290D (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Industries आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1084/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year:2018-19) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hydeabad. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Vs. Penna Cement Industries Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcp2290D (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) करदाताकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Sourabh Soparkar, Advocate राजस्वकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाईसमाप्तहोनेकीतिथि/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 11/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 2

iii) disallowance of the claim of deduction of the assessee company under Section 801A of the Act: Rs. 24,35,05,411/-; and (iv) addition under section 68 in respect of alleged bogus transactions with M/s. Lakshin Infradev Pvt. Ltd: Rs. 1,29,91,000/-, determined he income of the assessee company vide his order passed under section

SRI SHARADA VAIDIKA SMARTHA VIDYALAYAM SOCIETY, WARGAL,MEDAK DIST. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS,, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahassessment Year: N/A Sri Sharada Vaidika Vs. The Commissioner Of Smartha Vidyalayam Income Tax (Exemptions) Society, Wargal, Medak Hyderabad. District. Pan- Aalts0006K (Appellant) (Respondent)

iii) of the Act. Accordingly CIT (E) rejected assessee’s application filed u/s 10G of the Act. Aggrived, assessee is in appeal before us. 3. Before us Learned Counsel for assessee brought our attention to page 2 of the paper book and explained that about 60 students are studying in the Smartha Vidyalayam and they acame from various parts

INDIAN METAL PUBLIC CHARITIABLE TRUST,BHUBANESWAR vs. CIT, EXEMPTION, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 416/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2024-25)

Charitable Trust. It obtained approval u/s. 80G(5) of the Act in form 10AC on 14/10/2021 to be valid till Assessment Year 2024-25. Subsequently on 29/09/2023, the assessee filed Form No.10AB. Ld.CIT(E) rejected the application filed in Form No.10AB holding it to be infructuous and also barred by limitation, observing that the commencement of activities was much earlier

SRI MAISAMMA DEVATNA AMMAVARI DEVASTHANAM,MAHABUBNAGAR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD.

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Ita No Appellant Respondent 1 1043/Hyd/2025 Sri Kurumurthy Swamy Cit (Exemptions) Devasthanam, Hyderabad Mahbubnagar Pan: Aahts2887G 2 1044/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 3 1049/Hyd/2025 Sri Maisamma Devatna -Do- Ammavari Devasthanam Mahbubnagar Pan:Aamts0357A 4 1050/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do-

Trust having charitable objects and also carrying out the charitable activities since past several years, but the application of the assessee was dismissed only on the technical ground of wrong selection of section code. It is a matter of fact that the assessee initially applied in Form 10A but due to some technical bonafide mistake, a provisional registration as well

SRI KURUMURTHY SWAMY DEVASTHANAM,MAHABUBNAGAR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD.

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Ita No Appellant Respondent 1 1043/Hyd/2025 Sri Kurumurthy Swamy Cit (Exemptions) Devasthanam, Hyderabad Mahbubnagar Pan: Aahts2887G 2 1044/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 3 1049/Hyd/2025 Sri Maisamma Devatna -Do- Ammavari Devasthanam Mahbubnagar Pan:Aamts0357A 4 1050/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do-

Trust having charitable objects and also carrying out the charitable activities since past several years, but the application of the assessee was dismissed only on the technical ground of wrong selection of section code. It is a matter of fact that the assessee initially applied in Form 10A but due to some technical bonafide mistake, a provisional registration as well

SRI KURUMURTHY SWAMY DEVASTHANAM,MAHABUBNAGAR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Ita No Appellant Respondent 1 1043/Hyd/2025 Sri Kurumurthy Swamy Cit (Exemptions) Devasthanam, Hyderabad Mahbubnagar Pan: Aahts2887G 2 1044/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 3 1049/Hyd/2025 Sri Maisamma Devatna -Do- Ammavari Devasthanam Mahbubnagar Pan:Aamts0357A 4 1050/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do-

Trust having charitable objects and also carrying out the charitable activities since past several years, but the application of the assessee was dismissed only on the technical ground of wrong selection of section code. It is a matter of fact that the assessee initially applied in Form 10A but due to some technical bonafide mistake, a provisional registration as well

SRI MAISAMMA DEVATNA AMMAVARI DEVASTHANAM,MAHABUBNAGAR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Ita No Appellant Respondent 1 1043/Hyd/2025 Sri Kurumurthy Swamy Cit (Exemptions) Devasthanam, Hyderabad Mahbubnagar Pan: Aahts2887G 2 1044/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do- 3 1049/Hyd/2025 Sri Maisamma Devatna -Do- Ammavari Devasthanam Mahbubnagar Pan:Aamts0357A 4 1050/Hyd/2025 -Do- -Do-

Trust having charitable objects and also carrying out the charitable activities since past several years, but the application of the assessee was dismissed only on the technical ground of wrong selection of section code. It is a matter of fact that the assessee initially applied in Form 10A but due to some technical bonafide mistake, a provisional registration as well

SRISIVAKESAVA SRIDATTA KSHETRA SEVA SAMAJAM,PRAKASAM vs. ITO., WARD-1, ONGOLE

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.893 & 894/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2025-26) Srisivakesava Sridatta Vs. Income Tax Officer, Kshetra Seva Samajam, Ward-1, Addanki, Prakasam Ongole. District. Pan: Abvas5895E (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri C S Subrahmanyam, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 25/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 26/02/2026 Pronouncement:

80G(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"). Seva Samajam vs. ITO 2. At the threshold, we may herein observe that the captioned appeals were disposed of by the Tribunal vide its consolidated order passed in ITA Nos.893 and 894/Hyd/2025, dated 20/08/2025. However, on Miscellaneous Applications (MAs) filed by the assessee society, the aforesaid order

SRISIVAKESAVA SRIDATTA KSHTRA SEVA SAMAJAM,PRAKASAM vs. ITO., WARD-1, ONGOLE

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.893 & 894/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2025-26) Srisivakesava Sridatta Vs. Income Tax Officer, Kshetra Seva Samajam, Ward-1, Addanki, Prakasam Ongole. District. Pan: Abvas5895E (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri C S Subrahmanyam, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 25/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 26/02/2026 Pronouncement:

80G(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"). Seva Samajam vs. ITO 2. At the threshold, we may herein observe that the captioned appeals were disposed of by the Tribunal vide its consolidated order passed in ITA Nos.893 and 894/Hyd/2025, dated 20/08/2025. However, on Miscellaneous Applications (MAs) filed by the assessee society, the aforesaid order

RAIN CEMENTS LIMITED, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Rain Cements Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Rain Income Tax, Circle 3 (1) Cii Carbon (India) Ltd Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabcr8858F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Advocate Prathishta Singh & Advocate Deepak Chopra Revenue By: Dr.Rajendra Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 24.03.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(5) R.W.S. 260 Of The I.T. Act For The A.Y 2008-09. 2. This Appeal Was Earlier Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 18.10.2019. Subsequently Vide Ma No.15/Hyd/2020, Dated 23.3.2021, The Tribunal Recalled The Entire Order For Fresh Adjudication. Therefore, This Is A Recalled Matter.

80G. In para 3 of its judgment, the Apex Court clearly held that “this is not a case of information on a question of law”. Thus, the said judgment is clearly distinguishable and has erroneously been relied upon by the DRP. 12. He submitted that as per reason (a) reproduced above, the observation in the Audit was that other incomes

BRAHMANANDA ENLIGHTENMENT TRUST,HYDERABAD vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

trust has been granted registration under section 12AB of the Act vide Form No. 10AC dated 24.09.2021, which covers the period from A.Y. 2022–23 to A.Y. 2026–27. The ITA No.320/Hyd/2025 6 assessee was also granted provisional approval under section 80G in Form No. 10AC dated 23.04.2024. The assessee applied for final approval under section 80G in Form