BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

390 results for “condonation of delay”+ Cash Depositclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai987Mumbai613Delhi525Ahmedabad430Kolkata407Hyderabad390Pune375Bangalore347Jaipur235Chandigarh216Amritsar179Surat168Indore149Visakhapatnam148Cochin144Patna131Lucknow129Rajkot121Raipur111Agra86Cuttack72Nagpur72Panaji62Calcutta37Allahabad31Jabalpur31Guwahati25Karnataka23Jodhpur23Varanasi20Dehradun10Ranchi6SC5Telangana3

Key Topics

Addition to Income86Cash Deposit70Section 69A63Section 14759Section 153C59Section 14852Section 143(3)50Section 6842Section 142(1)

ANKAA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 105/HYD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2014-15
Section 132

cash deposited u/s 68 of the Act. Since the additions made by\nthe Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act are deleted on merits, in our\nconsidered view, the grounds raised by the assessee, challenging the\nvalidity of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer becomes\ninfructuous and thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as\ninfructuous

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(4) , HYDERABAD vs. ANKAA REALTORS , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 72/HYD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

Showing 1–20 of 390 · Page 1 of 20

...
42
Condonation of Delay37
Section 14436
Limitation/Time-bar31
For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

cash deposited u/s 68 of the Act. Since the additions made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act are deleted on merits, in our considered view, the grounds raised by the assessee, challenging the validity of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer becomes infructuous and thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ANKA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 104/HYD/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

cash deposited u/s 68 of the Act. Since the additions made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act are deleted on merits, in our considered view, the grounds raised by the assessee, challenging the validity of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer becomes infructuous and thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ANKA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOM, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 102/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

cash deposited u/s 68 of the Act. Since the additions made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act are deleted on merits, in our considered view, the grounds raised by the assessee, challenging the validity of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer becomes infructuous and thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ANKAA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 107/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

cash deposited u/s 68 of the Act. Since the additions made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act are deleted on merits, in our considered view, the grounds raised by the assessee, challenging the validity of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer becomes infructuous and thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ANKAA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 106/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

cash deposited u/s 68 of the Act. Since the additions made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act are deleted on merits, in our considered view, the grounds raised by the assessee, challenging the validity of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer becomes infructuous and thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ANKA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 103/HYD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

cash deposited u/s 68 of the Act. Since the additions made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act are deleted on merits, in our considered view, the grounds raised by the assessee, challenging the validity of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer becomes infructuous and thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ANKAA REALTORS , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 74/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

cash deposited u/s 68 of the Act. Since the additions made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act are deleted on merits, in our considered view, the grounds raised by the assessee, challenging the validity of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer becomes infructuous and thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ANKAA REALTORS, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 71/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

cash deposited u/s 68 of the Act. Since the additions made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act are deleted on merits, in our considered view, the grounds raised by the assessee, challenging the validity of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer becomes infructuous and thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4) ,HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. ANKAA REALTORS ,HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 75/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

cash deposited u/s 68 of the Act. Since the additions made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act are deleted on merits, in our considered view, the grounds raised by the assessee, challenging the validity of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer becomes infructuous and thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ANKAA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 108/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

cash deposited u/s 68 of the Act. Since the additions made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act are deleted on merits, in our considered view, the grounds raised by the assessee, challenging the validity of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer becomes infructuous and thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ANKAA REALTORS , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 73/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

cash deposited u/s 68 of the Act. Since the additions made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act are deleted on merits, in our considered view, the grounds raised by the assessee, challenging the validity of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer becomes infructuous and thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

DEMI REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes on the above terms

ITA 156/HYD/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

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

For Respondent: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakhsmi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 40a

deposit of self asst tax itself is demonstrated as a prosecutable offence, the consequent delay in filing of appeal should therefore not be condoned, and much less such inordinate delays of 1784 days for no genuine and convincing reasons should be condoned. Relying on following citation, delay of 1784 days should not be condoned.” Case laws: 1. Arvinder Singh

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 36/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri M. Satish – CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

cash deposits were made, was not declared in the return of income filed for the assessment year concerned. 6. The ld. CIT(Appeal) did not even revert back to the assessing officer to check whether the cheque book found during the search was declared in the return but believed in the plain averments of the assessee which are factually incorrect

ORBIT VENTURES,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 9/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri M. Satish – CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

cash deposits were made, was not declared in the return of income filed for the assessment year concerned. 6. The ld. CIT(Appeal) did not even revert back to the assessing officer to check whether the cheque book found during the search was declared in the return but believed in the plain averments of the assessee which are factually incorrect

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 34/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri M. Satish – CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

cash deposits were made, was not declared in the return of income filed for the assessment year concerned. 6. The ld. CIT(Appeal) did not even revert back to the assessing officer to check whether the cheque book found during the search was declared in the return but believed in the plain averments of the assessee which are factually incorrect

ORBIT VENTURES,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 13/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri M. Satish – CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

cash deposits were made, was not declared in the return of income filed for the assessment year concerned. 6. The ld. CIT(Appeal) did not even revert back to the assessing officer to check whether the cheque book found during the search was declared in the return but believed in the plain averments of the assessee which are factually incorrect

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 35/HYD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri M. Satish – CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

cash deposits were made, was not declared in the return of income filed for the assessment year concerned. 6. The ld. CIT(Appeal) did not even revert back to the assessing officer to check whether the cheque book found during the search was declared in the return but believed in the plain averments of the assessee which are factually incorrect

ORBIT VENTURES,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 10/HYD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri M. Satish – CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

cash deposits were made, was not declared in the return of income filed for the assessment year concerned. 6. The ld. CIT(Appeal) did not even revert back to the assessing officer to check whether the cheque book found during the search was declared in the return but believed in the plain averments of the assessee which are factually incorrect

AMBABHAVANI JETTEM,MAHABUBNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MAHBUBNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 604/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 147Section 148

condone the delay of 11 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4 ITA.No.604/Hyd./2024 5. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual and filed return of income for the assessment year 2017-2018 on 03.11.2017 declaring total income of Rs.10,90,820/-. The assessment has been