ASIAN TOURS AND TRAVELS,SECUNDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Asian Tours & Travels, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Secunderabad, Ward-10(1), 9-4-212/94, Opp To Hyderabad. Railway Station, Hyderabad. Telangana – 500003. Pan : Aakfa8752H. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, Sr.Ar. Date Of Hearing: 22/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/01/2024

condone the delay to decide the issue on merits”. 8. From the perusal of the submissions of the assessee before NFAC, Delhi, observed the following : (1) it is the case of the assessee that it has not received any intimation by way of post or through notice server and was not aware about the order passed and demand raised

PRYSMIAN CAVI E SISTEMI SRL INDIA PROJECT OFFICE (FORMERLY PIRELLI CAVI SISTEMI S P A INDIA PROJECT OFFICE),HYDERABAD vs. DCIT,( INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condone the delay of 2,996\ndays in filing the appeal and direct that the appeal be admitted for\nadjudication on merits.\n10. In addition to the aforesaid facts, the specific facts related to this appeal\nare that, pursuant to the directions of this Tribunal vide order dated\n25.07.2014 restoring the appeal arising from the assessment order dated\n29.03.2004

TRENDSET SUMANJALI WELFARE ASSOCIATION,HYDERABAD vs. CIT (EXEMPTION) , HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.935/Hyd/2025 [U/Sec.12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961] Trendset Sumanjali The Commissioner Of Welfare Association, Income Tax (Exemptions), Vs. Hyderabad – 500 034. Hyderabad – 500 004. Telangana. Pan Aaiat3303J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Pawan Kumar Chakrapani राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Pavan Kumar Beerla, Cit-Dr

section 12AB of the Act, dated 16/12/2024 was passed by the Honourable Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad. The appellate order was not received through mail nor was brought to the notice of the members of the Trust. It was only by the Chartered Accountant the members of the trust were informed that the order of rejection was passed

RR MARKETING,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

127 of the Rules, and therefore Appellant could not put forth the case. 2. Without prejudice to the above, the Id. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition made by the AO of Rs.6,94,004 as income from business. The Id. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the AO has not properly appreciated that the discount received are property

MAYUR STONES, HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1092 & 1093/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18) Mayur Stones Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 11(1) Pan:Aarfm5050H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate V. Sriram Niwas राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/03/2025 आदेश/Order

127 of the I.T. Rules, the notice and orders uploaded to the ITBA Portal amounts to proper service and therefore, the reasons explained by the assessee for the inordinate delay of 326 days is not reasonable or sufficient to condone the delay. Thus, he has objected to the condonation of delay. 6. We have considered the rival submission and carefully

MAYUR STONES, HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1092 & 1093/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18) Mayur Stones Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 11(1) Pan:Aarfm5050H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate V. Sriram Niwas राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/03/2025 आदेश/Order

127 of the I.T. Rules, the notice and orders uploaded to the ITBA Portal amounts to proper service and therefore, the reasons explained by the assessee for the inordinate delay of 326 days is not reasonable or sufficient to condone the delay. Thus, he has objected to the condonation of delay. 6. We have considered the rival submission and carefully

DESU ENTERPRISES,ONGOLE vs. ITO., WARD-1, ONGOLE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.549 & 589/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2015-16 & 2013-14) 1. M/S. Desu Enterprises, Ongole (A.P.) Pan: Aagfd1940C 2. Thalla Srisailam Goud, Ibrahimpatnam. Pan: Αιτpg3044K (Appellants) Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ongole. Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), Hyderabad. (Respondents) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessees By: राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri Sashank Dundu, Advocate Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr & Ms. Payal Gupta, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 07/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: These Appeals Are Filed By M/S. Desu Enterprises & Shri Thalla Srisailam Goud (“The Assessees”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 26.02.2024 & 09.04.2024 For The A.Ys. 2015-16 & 2013-14 Respectively. Since The Issues Involved In These Two Appeals Are Identical, They Are Heard Together & One Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

127 A of the Rules 1962 which provides a procedure for issuance of every notice or other document and the e-mail in [2022] 444 I.T.R. 41 (All.) PSK,J & NTR,J wp_18098_2022&batch electronic form/electronic mail which has to be issued from the designated e-mail address of such income tax authority. 20. Thus, after digitally signing

THILAK BABU BOPPANA,CHITTOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), TIRUPATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. (Accountant Member), Shri Ravish Sood (Judicial Member)

condone the delay involved in the filing of the present appeal. 11. Shri M.M. Shahid Sameer, Advocate, Learned Authorized Representative (for short, “Ld. AR”) for the assessee, at the threshold of hearing of the appeal assailed the validity of jurisdiction that was assumed by the AO for framing the assessment vide his order passed under section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s

THALLA SRISAILAM GOUD,IBRAHIMPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

127 A of the Rules 1962 which provides a procedure for issuance of every notice or other document and the e-mail in [2022] 444 I.T.R. 41 (All.) PSK,J & NTR,J wp_18098_2022&batch electronic form/electronic mail which has to be issued from the designated e-mail address of such income tax authority. 20. Thus, after digitally signing

ANANDARAO KOTA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.238/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2015-16) Shri Anandarao Kota, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Hyderabad. Ward 9(1), Pan: Cvopk0669Q Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: None. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/10/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 09/10/2025 आदेश/Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 27.07.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is That The Assessee Is An Individual, No Regular Return Of Income U/S.139 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") Was Filed For The A.Y. 2015-16. The Assessing Officer Based On The Information That The Assessee Made Cash Deposits Of Rs.1,03,97,300/- In The Savings Bank Account Formed Opinion That The Income Had Escaped Assessment

delay is condoned and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 6. On perusal of written submissions of the assessee and after hearing the Ld. DR, I find that the NFAC had issued notices of hearing through ITBA Portal. In my considered opinion, it is not a valid method and manner of service of notice as specified under the provisions

ASIF ALI MOHD,MAHABUBNAGAR vs. ITO., WARD-1, MAHABUBNAGAR

In the result, ITA.No.407/Hyd

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

condone the delay of 128 days in filing the instant appeals before the Tribunal and proceed to decide the appeals for adjudication. 3 ITA.Nos.407 & 408/Hyd./2025 ITA.No.407/Hyd./2025 – A.Y. 2013-2014 : 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds in the instant appeal : 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order

ASIF ALI MOHD,MAHABUBNAGAR vs. ITO., WARD-1, MAHABUBNAGAR

In the result, ITA.No.407/Hyd

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

condone the delay of 128 days in filing the instant appeals before the Tribunal and proceed to decide the appeals for adjudication. 3 ITA.Nos.407 & 408/Hyd./2025 ITA.No.407/Hyd./2025 – A.Y. 2013-2014 : 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds in the instant appeal : 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order

SAHAYATHA, PROHIBITION & EXCISE DEPARTMENT, TELANGANA STATE EMPLOYEES THRIFT AND BENEVOLENT MUTUAL ASSOCIATION, HYDERABADRUST, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.

127 days delay in ITA No. 1131/Hyd/2019; respectively. They have filed condonation petition(s) along with the affidavits averring therein that there was a communication gap with the Auditor’s Office as well as the auditor’s office was preoccupied with the work related to Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana causing the impugned delay in filing of the instant appeals

AROGYA SAHAYATHA, PROHIBITION & EXCISE DEPARTMENT, TELANGANA STATE EMPLOYEES HEALTH AND MEDICAL WELFARE TRUST, ,HYDERABAD vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.

127 days delay in ITA No. 1131/Hyd/2019; respectively. They have filed condonation petition(s) along with the affidavits averring therein that there was a communication gap with the Auditor’s Office as well as the auditor’s office was preoccupied with the work related to Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana causing the impugned delay in filing of the instant appeals

SAHAYATHA PROHIBITION & EXCISE DEPARTMENT, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE EMPLOYEES THRIFT AND BENEVOLENT MUTUAL ASSOCIATION,VIJAYAWADA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS,, HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.

127 days delay in ITA No. 1131/Hyd/2019; respectively. They have filed condonation petition(s) along with the affidavits averring therein that there was a communication gap with the Auditor’s Office as well as the auditor’s office was preoccupied with the work related to Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana causing the impugned delay in filing of the instant appeals

NNF - STATE CHAPTER,HYDERABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony(Through Virtual Hearing)

condone the delay of 11 days in the filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 5. The assessee has raised seven grounds in its appeal however, the cruxes of the issues are that the Ld. CIT (E), Hyderabad has erred in rejecting the application in Form No. 10 A & Form

NNF - STATE CHAPTER,HYDERABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony(Through Virtual Hearing)

condone the delay of 11 days in the filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 5. The assessee has raised seven grounds in its appeal however, the cruxes of the issues are that the Ld. CIT (E), Hyderabad has erred in rejecting the application in Form No. 10 A & Form

BHARAT KUMAR BANSAL,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.1000 To 1006/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20) Shri Bharat Kumar Bansal Vs. Hyderabad Pan:Abfpb6416P (Appellant) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle 2(1) Hyderabad (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा /Assessee By: Shri A Srinivas, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By:: | Shri S. Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: | 07/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Seven Appeals Are Filed By Shri Bharat Kumar Bansal (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) All Dated 07.03.2025 For The A.Ys. 2013- 14 To 2019-20. Since Common & Identical Issues Are Raised By The Assessee In All These Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. At The Outset, We Find There Is A Delay Of 06 Days In Filing Of All These Appeals Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed Separate Petitions For Condonation Of Delay Along With Copies Of The Affidavits Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay & Praying For Condonation Of The Same. After Considering The Reasons Stated By The Assessee & Upon Hearing The Submissions Of The Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. Dr”), We Are Satisfied That The Delay Was Due To Reasonable Cause. Accordingly, The Delay Of 06 Days In Filing Of All These Appeals Are Condoned & The Appeals Are Admitted For Adjudication On Merits. 3. Identical Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee In

delay of 06 days in filing of all these appeals are condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. Identical grounds have been raised by the assessee in ITA Nos.1000 to 1005/Hyd/2025 of the appeals. For the purpose of clarity, the grounds raised by the assessee in ITA No.1000/Hyd/2025 are reproduced as under: 4. The assessee