THE OOKAL FARMERS SERVICE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,WARANGAL vs. ITO., WARD-1, WARANGAL

In the result, all three appeals of the assesssee, i

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

delay in filing of the present appeal by the assessee appellant, and are of the view that as the same had crept in because of bonafide reasons, therefore, the same merits to be condoned. 12. Shri SNSR Chinmai, Advocate, the Ld. AR, submitted that both the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, dated 24.04.2022 and Notice

THE OOKAL FARMERS SERVICE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,WARANGAL vs. ITO., WARD-1, WARANGAL

In the result, all three appeals of the assesssee, i

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

delay in filing of the present appeal by the assessee appellant, and are of the view that as the same had crept in because of bonafide reasons, therefore, the same merits to be condoned. 12. Shri SNSR Chinmai, Advocate, the Ld. AR, submitted that both the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, dated 24.04.2022 and Notice

MADURAI TUTICORIN EXPRESSWAYS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE - 5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all three appeals of the assesssee, i

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)

delay in filing of the present appeal by the assessee appellant, and are of the view that as the same had crept in because of bonafide reasons, therefore, the same merits to be condoned. 12. Shri SNSR Chinmai, Advocate, the Ld. AR, submitted that both the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, dated 24.04.2022 and Notice

VIDYUT EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raoआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1878/Hyd./2025 Assessment Year 2018-2019 Vidyut Employees Co- The Dcit, Operative Housing Vs. Circle-6(1), Society, Hyderabad. Hyderabad – 500 004. Pin – 500 034. Telangana. Telangana. Pan Aaaav5182H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri Y V Bhanu Narayan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Suresh Babu Kn, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27.02.2026 आदेश/Order

151A read with Section 144B of the IT Act. As per the said Section, the said notice(s)/orders must have been issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer ("FAO") and not by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer("JAO"), as there is no concurrent jurisdiction of FAO and JAO to issue a notice/order under the Income Tax Act. As the impugned notice

KOTAPADU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE SOCIETY,PRAKASAM vs. ITO., WARD-1, ONGOLE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.763 & 764/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20) Kotapadu Primary Vs. Income Tax Officer Agricultural Cooperative Ward – 1 Society, Prakasam Ongole Pan:Aabak5758P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: C.A C. Subrahamanyam राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Sankar Pandit P, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: These Two Appeals Are Filed By Kotapadu Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Both Dated 28.02.2025 For The A.Y 2018-19 & A.Y. 2019-20 Respectively. Since Identical Issues Are Involved In These Two Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Page 1 Of 7

151A of the Income Tax Act, and therefore, invalid. 2. The show cause notice under section 148A(b) dated 24.03.2022, served on the same day, is invalid for failure to provide the statutorily required 7 clear days for compliance. As per settled legal principles, exclusion of the date of service and the terminal date is mandatory. The re-assessment initiated

KOTAPADUPRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE SOCIETY,PRAKASAM vs. ITO., WARD-1, ONGOLE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.763 & 764/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20) Kotapadu Primary Vs. Income Tax Officer Agricultural Cooperative Ward – 1 Society, Prakasam Ongole Pan:Aabak5758P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: C.A C. Subrahamanyam राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Sankar Pandit P, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: These Two Appeals Are Filed By Kotapadu Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Both Dated 28.02.2025 For The A.Y 2018-19 & A.Y. 2019-20 Respectively. Since Identical Issues Are Involved In These Two Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Page 1 Of 7

151A of the Income Tax Act, and therefore, invalid. 2. The show cause notice under section 148A(b) dated 24.03.2022, served on the same day, is invalid for failure to provide the statutorily required 7 clear days for compliance. As per settled legal principles, exclusion of the date of service and the terminal date is mandatory. The re-assessment initiated

CHANDINI DUVVURI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO (INT TAXN)-1, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

condone the delay of 37 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 6. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual and a non-resident during the Financial Year 2014-15 relevant to the A.Y. 2015-16. As per information available on record through the Risk Management Strategy

LINGAMGUNTA ADILAXMI,SECUNDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

Accordingly we have set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and quashed the impugned assessment order. Following the same reasoning, all these three appeals filed by the assessee are also allowed in ...

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaappeal In Ita Assessee Revenue A.Y 1317/Hyd/2025 Smt. Lingamgunta Income Tax Officer 2015-16 Adilaxmi, Secunderabad Ward 10 (1) Pan:Amnpl4940M Hyderabad 915/Hyd/2025 Shri Raghu Alekh Barli Dy. Cit 2018-19 Hyderabad Circle 6(1) Pan:Ahjpa1085F Hyderabad 1487/Hyd/2025 Sanzyme Private Ltd Dy. Cit 2019-20 Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaacu2692R Hyderabad 1606/Hyd/2025 Shri Bikaram Income Tax Officer 2018-19 Pushpender, Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan: Cebpp4471F Hyderabad िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao & Sashank Dundu & C.A. Kumar Pal Tated राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rahman, Sr. Dr

delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Page 3 of 29 ITA Nos 1317 915 1487 and 1606 6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against

RAGHU ALEKH BARLI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

Accordingly we have set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and quashed the impugned assessment order. Following the same reasoning, all these three appeals filed by the assessee are also allowed in ...

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaappeal In Ita Assessee Revenue A.Y 1317/Hyd/2025 Smt. Lingamgunta Income Tax Officer 2015-16 Adilaxmi, Secunderabad Ward 10 (1) Pan:Amnpl4940M Hyderabad 915/Hyd/2025 Shri Raghu Alekh Barli Dy. Cit 2018-19 Hyderabad Circle 6(1) Pan:Ahjpa1085F Hyderabad 1487/Hyd/2025 Sanzyme Private Ltd Dy. Cit 2019-20 Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaacu2692R Hyderabad 1606/Hyd/2025 Shri Bikaram Income Tax Officer 2018-19 Pushpender, Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan: Cebpp4471F Hyderabad िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao & Sashank Dundu & C.A. Kumar Pal Tated राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rahman, Sr. Dr

delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Page 3 of 29 ITA Nos 1317 915 1487 and 1606 6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against

SANZYME PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

Accordingly we have set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and quashed the impugned assessment order. Following the same reasoning, all these three appeals filed by the assessee are also allowed in ...

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaappeal In Ita Assessee Revenue A.Y 1317/Hyd/2025 Smt. Lingamgunta Income Tax Officer 2015-16 Adilaxmi, Secunderabad Ward 10 (1) Pan:Amnpl4940M Hyderabad 915/Hyd/2025 Shri Raghu Alekh Barli Dy. Cit 2018-19 Hyderabad Circle 6(1) Pan:Ahjpa1085F Hyderabad 1487/Hyd/2025 Sanzyme Private Ltd Dy. Cit 2019-20 Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaacu2692R Hyderabad 1606/Hyd/2025 Shri Bikaram Income Tax Officer 2018-19 Pushpender, Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan: Cebpp4471F Hyderabad िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao & Sashank Dundu & C.A. Kumar Pal Tated राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rahman, Sr. Dr

delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Page 3 of 29 ITA Nos 1317 915 1487 and 1606 6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against

BIKARAM PUSHPENDER,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

Accordingly we have set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and quashed the impugned assessment order. Following the same reasoning, all these three appeals filed by the assessee are also allowed in ...

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaappeal In Ita Assessee Revenue A.Y 1317/Hyd/2025 Smt. Lingamgunta Income Tax Officer 2015-16 Adilaxmi, Secunderabad Ward 10 (1) Pan:Amnpl4940M Hyderabad 915/Hyd/2025 Shri Raghu Alekh Barli Dy. Cit 2018-19 Hyderabad Circle 6(1) Pan:Ahjpa1085F Hyderabad 1487/Hyd/2025 Sanzyme Private Ltd Dy. Cit 2019-20 Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaacu2692R Hyderabad 1606/Hyd/2025 Shri Bikaram Income Tax Officer 2018-19 Pushpender, Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan: Cebpp4471F Hyderabad िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Shri S. Rama Rao & Sashank Dundu & C.A. Kumar Pal Tated राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rahman, Sr. Dr

delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Page 3 of 29 ITA Nos 1317 915 1487 and 1606 6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against

SATYA KOUR,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-17(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 4. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under : 1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified both in law and in the facts and circumstances of the case; 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred

BANDARU CHANDRA SEKHAR,KADAPA vs. ITO, WARD-1, PRODDATUR, PRODDATUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1716/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2019-2020 Bandaru Chandra The Income Tax Officer, Sekhar, Ward-1, Proddutur. Jammalamadugu Po & Vs. Pin – 516 350. Taluka, Kadapa Dist. Andhra Pradesh. Pin – 516 434. Pan Aozpb5357G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca K A Sai Prasad राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms Kritika Jaiswal, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 17.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19.12.2025 आदेश/Order

condone the delay of 156 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A). 9. In ground no.4, the assessee has raised the issue of validity of the notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer [in short “JAO”] u/sec.148 of the Act and consequent re-assessment order. 10. The learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has submitted that

RAMESH SISTLA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

delay of 10 days in filing of\nthe appeal is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for\nadjudication on merits.\n\n3.\nappeal:\nThe assessee has raised the following grounds of\n“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the\nimpugned order u/s.250 of the I.T. Act, 1961 passed by the\nlearned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

MOHD NOORUL HUDA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons in both the appeals that, against the order passed under Section 147 read with Section 144 dated 17.03.2022, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) on 10.10.2023. In Form No.35, the assessee had provided the email ID mohdnoorulhuda513@gmail.com and opted not to receive communication by email. However, the CIT(A) sent the notices and the order under Section 250 to the old email ID noorulhuda80085@gmail.com, to which the

condone the delay of 105 days in filing the appeals before the Tribunal and admit the appeals for adjudication. 5. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual and had filed his return of income for A.Y. 2016-17 on 05-08-2017, declaring total income of Rs.3,02,550/-. The case has been subsequently

MOHD NOORUL HUDA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons in both the appeals that, against the order passed under Section 147 r.w. Section 144 dated 17.03.2022, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) on 10.10.2023. In Form No.35, the assessee had provided the email ID mohdnoorulhuda513@gmail.com and opted not to receive communication by email. However, the CIT(A) sent the notices and the order under Section 250 to the old email ID noorulhuda80085@gmail.com, to which the asses

condone the delay of 105 days in filing the appeals before the Tribunal and admit the appeals for adjudication. 5. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual and had filed his return of income for A.Y. 2016-17 on 05-08-2017, declaring total income of Rs.3,02,550/-. The case has been subsequently

DEEPTI SOCIAL SERVICE SOCIETY,HINDUPUR vs. ITO., EXEMPTION WARD, TIRUPATI,

Bench: Us:

condoning the delay differs in facts and is not applicable to the case of the appellant. 1.3 The Ld. CIT(A) himself has accepted that an appeal having merits should not be thrown away merely because there is some delay in filing the appeal, however he has contradicted himself by rejecting the appeal on delay in filing without considering

KARTHIK KUMAR KYATHAM,NIZAMABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, ADILABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is\nallowed

condoning the\ndelay in filing the appeal on the reason of certain circumstances\nbeyond the control of the appellant and the CIT(A) ought to have\nextended the principles of natural justice.\n3b) The learned CIT(A) ought to have taken a favourable\ninterpretation of the benevolent provisions of section 249(3) of Act\nand ought to have contended