MALIHA SYEDA,USA vs. ITO (INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the “lead” appeal of the assessee ITA.No.833/Hyd./2024 for the assessment year 2013-2014 is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 144C(13) dated 08.01.2024 is barred by limitation and is liable to be quashed and thus, we quash the re-assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act dt.08.01.2024 for the A.Y. 2016-17. 19 ITA.Nos.833, 834, 823 & 824/Hyd./2024 11.1. Since the additional grounds raised by the assessee

MALIHA SYEDA,USA vs. ITO (INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the “lead” appeal of the assessee ITA.No.833/Hyd./2024 for the assessment year 2013-2014 is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 144C(13) dated 08.01.2024 is barred by limitation and is liable to be quashed and thus, we quash the re-assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act dt.08.01.2024 for the A.Y. 2016-17. 19 ITA.Nos.833, 834, 823 & 824/Hyd./2024 11.1. Since the additional grounds raised by the assessee

MALIHA SYEDA,USA vs. ITO (INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the “lead” appeal of the assessee ITA.No.833/Hyd./2024 for the assessment year 2013-2014 is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 144C(13) dated 08.01.2024 is barred by limitation and is liable to be quashed and thus, we quash the re-assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act dt.08.01.2024 for the A.Y. 2016-17. 19 ITA.Nos.833, 834, 823 & 824/Hyd./2024 11.1. Since the additional grounds raised by the assessee

MALIHA SYEDA,USA vs. ITO (INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the “lead” appeal of the assessee ITA.No.833/Hyd./2024 for the assessment year 2013-2014 is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 144C(13) dated 08.01.2024 is barred by limitation and is liable to be quashed and thus, we quash the re-assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act dt.08.01.2024 for the A.Y. 2016-17. 19 ITA.Nos.833, 834, 823 & 824/Hyd./2024 11.1. Since the additional grounds raised by the assessee

ORBIS REAL ESTATE FUND I,HYDERABAD (AUTH. REP.) vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 - 2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) dated 30.06.2023 as per ITA No.785/Hyd/2024 2 the direction of Learned Dispute Resolution Panel-1, Bangalore (“Ld. DRP”) dated 30.05.2023 for the A.Y. 2020-21. 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 356 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal, for which

PRAKASH KANYADARA,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (INT TAXN)-1, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

section 144C(2) of the Act, the limitation is available to the assessee for thirty days from the date of receipt of the draft assessment order and, therefore, the objections dated 28/06/2023 submitted by the assessee at the Aayakar Seva Kendra are well within the time and merely because those were forwarded to the learned DRP by letter dated 14/07/2023

NICHINO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY NICHINO CHEMICAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED NOW MERGED),HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.366/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Nichino India Private Dcit / Acit Limited (Formerly Nichino Vs. Circle-5(1) Chemical India Private Hyderabad Limited, Now Merged) Hyderabad [Pan : Aaecn5394B] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee By: Ms.Suvibha Nolkha, Ar राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue By : Shri D.Praveen, Dr सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/09/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement On: 25/09/2024

144C(3) and 144B of the Act was passed on 09/11/2023, determining the loss at Rs.85,01,308/-. 3. Assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A) against the order dated 06/12/2023 under section 143(1) of the Act with a delay, stating that considering the changes in the Income Tax portal and the assessment proceedings were already initiated

PRAKASH LAL POTLURI,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (INT TAXN)-2,HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16 Prakash Lal Potluri, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. (International Taxation)-2, Hyderabad. Pan : Gnkpp1085B. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Sri M. Vijay Kumar – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.02.2024

Section 144C(2) and (3), in case, the assessee fails to file objections to the draft assessment order, then the issue shall be decided by the DRP in accordance with the law. No power is given to the DRP to condone the delay in filing the objections for draft assessment order. 7.1. In the absence of specific provision

PRAKASH LAL POTLURI,USA vs. ITO (INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.567/Hyd/2023 & 1284/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2015-16)

delay of 18 days in filing of this appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds : 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an NRI, who has not filed any Return of Income (“ROI”) for A.Y. 2015-16. The Ld. AO found from the available

KAPA SINDHU MITRA,USA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (INT TAXN)-1, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha Gआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.513/Hyd./2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years 2016-2017 Kapa Sindhu Mitra, 20148, Holly Hock Terrace, The Income Tax Officer – Ash Burn, V A, Vs. [Int. Taxn)-1, Hyderabad – 500 004. United States Of America. Pan Azcpk8030D (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By : Sri Sashank Dundu, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 29.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 31.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2016-2017. 2. The Registry has reported delay of 01 day in filing the present appeal. We have heard the learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee as well as learned DR for the Revenue and considered the relevant material on record. At the outset, we find that the assessee

RAMAGOPAL VARMA RAMARAJU,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, INTERENATIONAL TAXATION-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee arising from the assessment order passed u/sec

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /It(It)A No.507/Hyd/2025 & Ita.No.1302/Hyd./2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year 2015-2016 Ramgopal Varma The Income Tax Officer Ramaraju, Hyderabad. Vs. [Int.Taxn]-2, Hyderabad Pin – 500 060. Telangana. Pin - 500 004. Telangana. Pan Arppr7316E (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri S Rama Rao, Advocate Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: & Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 15.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

condonation of delay wrongly relying on the AO's endorsement in the assessment order that no communication with regard to filing of objections before the Hon'ble DRP was intimated to the AO, which is factually not correct since the appellant-assessee filed objections in Form-35A before DRP on 26.02.2024 within due date and also intimated the AO through

D. E. SHAW INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1154/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2020-21) M/S. D.E. Shaw India Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Ltd., Hyderabad. Tax, Pan:Aaacd7214J Circle 8(1), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S.P. Chidambaram, Adv. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 01/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 12/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By M/S. D E Shaw India Pvt. Ltd. (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Assessment Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. Ao”) U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) Dated 27.06.2024 For The A.Y. 2020-21. 2. At The Outset, It Is Seen That There Is A Delay Of 66 Days In Filing Of The Present Appeal, For Which The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petition Explaining The Reasons For Delay In Filing Of The Appeal. As Per Record, The Appeal Was Required To Be Filed On Or Before

144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) dated 27.06.2024 for the A.Y. 2020-21. 2. At the outset, it is seen that there is a delay of 66 days in filing of the present appeal, for which the assessee has filed condonation petition explaining the reasons for delay in filing of the appeal

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE1-(2), HYDERABAD vs. M/S. VPR MINING INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly\nallowed

condone the delay of 51\ndays in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to\nadjudicate the appeal as under.\n6.\nBriefly stated facts of the case are that, the\nassessee company is engaged in the business of mining /\nexcavation of coal, removal of over burden and execution of\n\nother related works. The company is also engaged

PRIMERA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”), assessee filed this appeal. 2. At the outset, learned AR submitted that a delay of 15 days occurred in filing the appeal due to the covid complications suffered by the concerned persons and submitted that a meritorious case may not be thrown

SHAMSU UL ZOHA JERMAIN,COULSDON, UNITED KINGDOM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (INT TAXN)-1, HYDERABAD.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

delay of 243 days in filing the appeal is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : ITA No.1125/Hyd/2024 5 4. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a non-resident individual who did not file any return of income

AZINGO SOFT SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT.LTD., HYD,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

delay of 1 day in filing of this appeal by the Revenue is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds before the Tribunal: “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the final assessment order dated 30 January 2015 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. AZINGO SOFT SYSTEMS INDIA PVT. LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

delay of 1 day in filing of this appeal by the Revenue is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds before the Tribunal: “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the final assessment order dated 30 January 2015 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle

MADHUVALLI LAKAMRAJU,USA vs. ADIT, (INT TAXN)-1, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Smt. Madhuvalli Vs. Adit (Int Taxn)-1, Lakamraju, California, Usa. Hyderabad. C/O. B. Narsing Rao & Co., Chartered Accountants, Jubiliee Hills, Hyderabad. Pan : Aczpl9709J. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas. C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Th. Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.08.2023 O R D E R Per Shri Laliet Kumar, J.M. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee, Feeling Aggrieved By The Directions Issued By The Income Tax Officer (Osd) & Secretary (Drp-1), Bengaluru Invoking Proceedings U/S 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y 2013-14 On The Following Grounds :

144C(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y 2013-14 on the following grounds : “1 . The order of the Hon'ble DPR is erroneous in law as well as facts of the case. 2. The Hon'ble DPR without considering the information submitted, finalized the assessment proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.144C(13) of the IT Act and therefore