RSVCPL-ALAM (JV),HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section 144B of the Act on 12.05.2021, determining total income at Rs.82,96,138/-; after making addition of Rs. 65,62,778/- on account of Net Profit rate. 4. Feeling aggrieved with the order passed by Ld. AO, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 191 days. However the Ld. CIT(A) ITA No.407/Hyd/2024

SYED MOHAMMED ASAD ULLAH HUSSAINI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.268/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Syed Mohammed Asad Vs. Acit, Ullah Hussaini, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Abfph0148G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 03/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Cit(Appeals)-12, Hyderabad, Dated 14.09.2023, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, ”Ao”) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 153C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”), Dated 28.03.2022, For The Assessment Year 2016- 17. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order Of The Cit(Appeals) On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us.

138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and that, in case of default, he would not 5 Syed Mohammed Asad Ullah Hussaini vs ACIT object to the lenders taking possession of the properties that were offered as security. 6. Another document that was seized in the course of the search proceedings, i.e., Page 89 of Annexure A/MAS/Loc169 /AB/KB/02, written

CHILLAKURU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED NO V 529,PELLAKUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GUDUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.No.1522/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2018-2019 Chillakuru Primary The Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Ward-1, Gudur. Cooperative Society Vs. Pin – 524 101. Limited No.529, State Of Andhra Pellakur. Pradesh. Pin – 524 129. Tirupati. Pan Aabac1880A (Appellant) (Respondent) -None- िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By : राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Sri Karthik Manickam, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07.04.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10.04.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

condonation of delay. In an alternative plea, the appellant has also stated that the appellant society works on mutuality, therefore surplus under mutual agreement is not real profit and thus, income should have been exempted. 5.3. In this regard, it is important to mention that section 80AC of Income-tax Act has been amended w.e.f. 01.04.2018 applicable from

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), HYDERABAD

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee company, being devoid and bereft of any substance, is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1236 & 1237/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2021-22 & 2022-23) Vivimed Labs Limited, Vs. Dcit, Hyderabad. Central Circle-3(4), Pan: Aaacv6060A Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 05/01/2026 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay

AJAY KUMAR AGARWAL,ADILABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-2020 Ajay Kumar Agarwal, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Adilabad. Income Tax, Pan : Abfpa5795A. Central Circle – 1(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Mantri, Ca Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 15.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.02.2023

section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay

RAAJASEKAR JEEVITHA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Rajasekar Jeevitha, Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O.P. Murali & Co., Income Tax, Chartered Accountants, Central Circle – 2(3), 6-3-655/2/3, Hyderabad. Somajiguda, Hyderabad - 500082 Pan : Aagpj7813A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Shri A.P. Babu, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing: 05.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.10.2023

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay

LATE VAMANRAO RAMALINGAM ARCOT L/R BY SANGEETHA VAMANRAO,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-13(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.584/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Vamanrao Ramalingam Vs. Income Tax Officer Arcot L/R By Smt. Sangeetha Ward 13 (1) Vamanrao, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aclpa4148G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: C.A A.V. Saisudha राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 25/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 30/06/2025 आदेश/Order

delay of 2 days in filing the present appeal is condoned. 4. The assessee has filed the following grounds of appeal: Page 2 of 8 ITA No 584 of 2025 Late Vamanrao Ramalingam Arcot 5. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 are regarding the validity of the re-assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144/144B

A.P. POWER GENERATION CORPN. LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

delay in filing of this appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a State PSU engaged in power generation, filed its return of income on 28.09.2010 declaring total income at Nil under the normal provisions and Rs.484,74,65,032/- u/s 115JB

ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

delay in filing of this appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a State PSU engaged in power generation, filed its return of income on 28.09.2010 declaring total income at Nil under the normal provisions and Rs.484,74,65,032/- u/s 115JB

DST WORLDWIDE SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Appeal is allowed in above terms

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

delay is condoned therefore. :- 2 -: 3. We notice at the outset that there is hardly any need for us to delve much deeper so far as the assessee’s sole substantive grievance challenging Arm’s Length Price (ALP) adjustment pertaining to interest on receivables of Rs.16,82,292/-; is concerned. We make it clear first of all that such interest

ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCC HES JV, HYDERABAD

condone the delay and admit all the appeals for hearing. 3. The grounds of appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No.682/Hyd/2024 read as under : "1. Both on the fact and in the circumstance of the case, the ld.CIT(A) is not justified in deleting disallowance of Rs. 11,56,60,835/- made u/s 80IA(13). 2. Whether

NULAND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFIERS ,WARD -16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Nuland Infrastructure Vs. Income Tax Officer (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Ward 16(2) Pan:Aaccn5235D Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri T. Rajender Prasad, Ca Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 02/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 04/08/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 8.5.2020 Of The Learned Cit (A)-4, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2011-12. 2. There Is A Delay Of 545 Days In Filing Of This Appeal By The Assessee For Which The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Application Along With An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay Which Is Due To The Prevailing Covid. After Hearing Both The Sides & Following The Decision Of The Hon'Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Suo Moto Write Petition (C) No.3 Of 2020 Order Dated 10.01.2022 Wherein It Is Held That The Period From 15.3.2020 Till

delay in filing of the appeal is condoned. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of undertaking infrastructure activities. It filed its return of income on 21.7.2011 declaring total income of Rs.Nil. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened and notice u/s 148 of the Act dated

ACIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD vs. NCC HES JV, MADHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

condone the delay and admit all the appeals for hearing. 3. The grounds of appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No.682/Hyd/2024 read as under : “1. Both on the fact and in the circumstance of the case, the ld.CIT(A) is not justified in deleting disallowance of Rs. 11,56,60,835/- made u/s 80IA(13). 2. Whether

NAVAYUGA ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

138 taxmann.com 416 (Gujarat High Court). For the above said purposes, we are reproducing the finding portion of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rachana Infrastructure which in turn had relied upon other decisions and which is as under: “7. So far as the first relief which is sought for by the writ applicant as regards

NAVAYUGA ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

138 taxmann.com 416 (Gujarat High Court). For the above said purposes, we are reproducing the finding portion of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rachana Infrastructure which in turn had relied upon other decisions and which is as under: “7. So far as the first relief which is sought for by the writ applicant as regards

NAVAYUGA ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

138 taxmann.com 416 (Gujarat High Court). For the above said purposes, we are reproducing the finding portion of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rachana Infrastructure which in turn had relied upon other decisions and which is as under: “7. So far as the first relief which is sought for by the writ applicant as regards

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

138 taxmann.com 416 (Gujarat High Court). For the above said purposes, we are reproducing the finding portion of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rachana Infrastructure which in turn had relied upon other decisions and which is as under : 31 M/s. HES Infra Pvt. Ltd. “7. So far as the first relief which is sought

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

138 taxmann.com 416 (Gujarat High Court). For the above said purposes, we are reproducing the finding portion of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rachana Infrastructure which in turn had relied upon other decisions and which is as under : 31 M/s. HES Infra Pvt. Ltd. “7. So far as the first relief which is sought