PARANJYOTHI THOTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. Cit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Ajqpt7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/02/2026 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 09/09/2025 & 25/09/2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Page 1 Of 33

reopening of the assessment, the assessee neither furnished any return of income nor explained the case. Therefore, the argument of the assessee that the property sold for the year under consideration is HUF property and the assessee cannot be assessed in her individual capacity is an argument to Page 13 of 33 ITA Nos 2050 and 2079 of 2025 Paranjyothi

VIRCHOW PETROCHEMICAL PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

condone the delay involved in the filing of the present appeal. 16. Coming to the merits of the case, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee company, which is engaged in the business of manufacturing of pharmaceuticals, was originally assessed by the AO vide his order passed under section 143(3) of the Act, dated 11/12/2018, wherein, after exhaustive deliberations

KUMUD BAJAJ,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, KHAMMAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.782/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Kumud Bajaj, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward-1, Pan: Acepb3914A Khammam. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Smt. S. Sandhya, Advocate राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Shri K. Vamsi Krishna, Sr. Ar

delay therein may be condoned only subject to the satisfaction that the appellant had sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period, as evident from the plain language of section 249 extracted as under: “249(2) the appeal shall be presented within thirty days of the following date, that is to say, — (a) Where the appeal is under section

DCIT, CIRCLE-14(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. M.R.V. PRASAD, HYD, HYDERABAD

Appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross objection

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

delay is condoned therefore. 3. Coming to the Revenue’s and assessee’s respective pleadings regarding the sole legal issue of validity of the re-opening herein taken recourse to by the Assessing Officer after recording reasons to believe that the latter’s taxable income liable to be assessed had escaped assessment, we note that the CIT(A)’s detailed

AMSRI BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, SECUNDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Amsri Builders Pvt. Vs. The Dy. Cit, Central Ltd., Secunderabad. Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaeca2834R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Amsri Constructions Vs. The Dy. Cit, Central Pvt. Ltd., Secunderabad. Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aafca5309Q (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee By : Shri K.C Devdas Revenue By : Smt. B.K Vishnu Priya Date Of Hearing : 06-03-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 23-05-2018 Order Per P. Madhavi Devi, J.M.:

delay is condoned. 1.1 In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The order of the Hon’ble CIT(A) is erroneous in law as well as facts of the case. 2. The Hon’ble CIT(A) ought to have held that the A.O erred in initiation of proceedings

AMSRI CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, SECUNDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Amsri Builders Pvt. Vs. The Dy. Cit, Central Ltd., Secunderabad. Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaeca2834R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Amsri Constructions Vs. The Dy. Cit, Central Pvt. Ltd., Secunderabad. Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aafca5309Q (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee By : Shri K.C Devdas Revenue By : Smt. B.K Vishnu Priya Date Of Hearing : 06-03-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 23-05-2018 Order Per P. Madhavi Devi, J.M.:

delay is condoned. 1.1 In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The order of the Hon’ble CIT(A) is erroneous in law as well as facts of the case. 2. The Hon’ble CIT(A) ought to have held that the A.O erred in initiation of proceedings

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs. K BALA KRISHNA , TADIPATRI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Rifaur Rahmansl

reopening of assessment has not been fulfilled. He therefore prayed for dismissal of the Revenue’s appeals and also for setting aside of all the assessments for the A.Y. 2009-10. 18. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Department, Sri B. Narasimha Sharma, prayed that the delay in filing of the Revenue’s appeals be condoned

DASARI KESHANNA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, PRODDATUR, PRODDATUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Rifaur Rahmansl

reopening of assessment has not been fulfilled. He therefore prayed for dismissal of the Revenue’s appeals and also for setting aside of all the assessments for the A.Y. 2009-10. 18. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Department, Sri B. Narasimha Sharma, prayed that the delay in filing of the Revenue’s appeals be condoned

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs. K MADHU KUMAR, TADIPATRI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Rifaur Rahmansl

reopening of assessment has not been fulfilled. He therefore prayed for dismissal of the Revenue’s appeals and also for setting aside of all the assessments for the A.Y. 2009-10. 18. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Department, Sri B. Narasimha Sharma, prayed that the delay in filing of the Revenue’s appeals be condoned

SREENIVASULU BANDELA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Rifaur Rahmansl

reopening of assessment has not been fulfilled. He therefore prayed for dismissal of the Revenue’s appeals and also for setting aside of all the assessments for the A.Y. 2009-10. 18. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Department, Sri B. Narasimha Sharma, prayed that the delay in filing of the Revenue’s appeals be condoned

BOLLAM CHINNA PULLAIAH TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Rifaur Rahmansl

reopening of assessment has not been fulfilled. He therefore prayed for dismissal of the Revenue’s appeals and also for setting aside of all the assessments for the A.Y. 2009-10. 18. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Department, Sri B. Narasimha Sharma, prayed that the delay in filing of the Revenue’s appeals be condoned

SALVADI SEKHAR, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Rifaur Rahmansl

reopening of assessment has not been fulfilled. He therefore prayed for dismissal of the Revenue’s appeals and also for setting aside of all the assessments for the A.Y. 2009-10. 18. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Department, Sri B. Narasimha Sharma, prayed that the delay in filing of the Revenue’s appeals be condoned

RAMESH GANDIKOTA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Rifaur Rahmansl

reopening of assessment has not been fulfilled. He therefore prayed for dismissal of the Revenue’s appeals and also for setting aside of all the assessments for the A.Y. 2009-10. 18. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Department, Sri B. Narasimha Sharma, prayed that the delay in filing of the Revenue’s appeals be condoned

AVVARI RAVI SEKHAR, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Rifaur Rahmansl

reopening of assessment has not been fulfilled. He therefore prayed for dismissal of the Revenue’s appeals and also for setting aside of all the assessments for the A.Y. 2009-10. 18. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Department, Sri B. Narasimha Sharma, prayed that the delay in filing of the Revenue’s appeals be condoned

NARABOYENA GANGARAJU, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Rifaur Rahmansl

reopening of assessment has not been fulfilled. He therefore prayed for dismissal of the Revenue’s appeals and also for setting aside of all the assessments for the A.Y. 2009-10. 18. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Department, Sri B. Narasimha Sharma, prayed that the delay in filing of the Revenue’s appeals be condoned

VENKATANNA DARA, TADIPATRI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Rifaur Rahmansl

reopening of assessment has not been fulfilled. He therefore prayed for dismissal of the Revenue’s appeals and also for setting aside of all the assessments for the A.Y. 2009-10. 18. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Department, Sri B. Narasimha Sharma, prayed that the delay in filing of the Revenue’s appeals be condoned

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs. B C PULLAIAH, TADIPATRI, TADIPATRI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Rifaur Rahmansl

reopening of assessment has not been fulfilled. He therefore prayed for dismissal of the Revenue’s appeals and also for setting aside of all the assessments for the A.Y. 2009-10. 18. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Department, Sri B. Narasimha Sharma, prayed that the delay in filing of the Revenue’s appeals be condoned

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ANANTAPUR vs. Y CHANDRA SEKHAR, TADIPATRI, TADIPATRI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Rifaur Rahmansl

reopening of assessment has not been fulfilled. He therefore prayed for dismissal of the Revenue’s appeals and also for setting aside of all the assessments for the A.Y. 2009-10. 18. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Department, Sri B. Narasimha Sharma, prayed that the delay in filing of the Revenue’s appeals be condoned