ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2), HYDERABAD vs. AMR INDIA LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, Cross Objection No

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved. 13 ITA.Nos.534 & 535/Hyd./2024 & C.O.Nos.4 & 5/Hyd./2025 The question involved in the present set of appeals and review petition is answered accordingly in terms of the above and the appeals and review petition preferred by the Revenue are hereby dismissed. No costs." 6.3.1. Applying the judgment

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD vs. MADHUCON AGRA JAIPUR EXPRESSWAYS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, Revenue appeals for the A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.285 & 286/Hyd/2018 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

section 43 of the I.T. Act, 1961. It is the cash support in the nature of shareholders fund to make the project viable and to provide financial strength to the assessee to avail further financial support from the financial institutions in the shape of loan. The learned CIT (A) has considered this issue in para 5.3 to 5.3.2 as under

MAHUA BHARATPUR EXPRESSWAYS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MADHUCON AGRA- JAIPUR EXPRESSWAYS LIMITED),),HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, Revenue appeals for the A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.285 & 286/Hyd/2018 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

section 43 of the I.T. Act, 1961. It is the cash support in the nature of shareholders fund to make the project viable and to provide financial strength to the assessee to avail further financial support from the financial institutions in the shape of loan. The learned CIT (A) has considered this issue in para 5.3 to 5.3.2 as under

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD vs. MADHUCON AGRA JAIPUR EXPRESSWAYS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, Revenue appeals for the A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.285 & 286/Hyd/2018 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

section 43 of the I.T. Act, 1961. It is the cash support in the nature of shareholders fund to make the project viable and to provide financial strength to the assessee to avail further financial support from the financial institutions in the shape of loan. The learned CIT (A) has considered this issue in para 5.3 to 5.3.2 as under

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

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NELLORE vs. VENKATA RAMANAMMA SAKAMURI, NELLORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue being devoid and bereft of any substance is dismissed

Bench: Us:

245/-, but had not filed his return of income for the subject year, issued notice under section 148 of the Act. 3. Thereafter, the AO vide his order passed under section 147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 19/02/2024 determined the income of the assessee at Rs. 3,53,21,425/- after making certain additions, viz., (i) addition

ATGC BIOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2015-16

section 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, “the Act”). Heard both sides. Case files perused. 2. The captioned appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 7 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the bench to condone the delay. We heard the party on this preliminary issue. Having regard to the reasons given

SRIMANTHI KANTHIMATHI KUMARASWAMI MUDALIAR KALYANAMANDAPAM TRUST,CHITTOOR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President\nAND\nShri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member\n\nआ.अपी.सं / ITA No.690/Hyd/2025\n(निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2025-26)\n\n| Srimanthi Kanthimathi\nKumaraswamy Mudaliar\nKalyanamandapam Trust,\nChittoor\nPAN:ABDTS060C\n(Appellant)\nVs.\nCIT (Exemptions)\nHyderabad\n(Respondent)\n\nनिर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee by:\nराजस्व द्वारा / Revenue by::\nShri A Mahesh, CA\nShri Narender Kumar Naik,\nCIT(DR)\n\nसुनवाई की तारीख / Date of hearing: | 09/07/2025\nघोषणा की

245 ITR 538 (SC)\nR & B Falcon (A) pty ltd. vs CIT 301 ITR 309 (SC)\nLIC vs Retires LIC officers association AIR 2008 SC 1485\n\n8. The CIT(E) failed to follow the principle that ".. Procedural prescriptions are\nhandmaids, not mistresses of justice and failure of fair play is the spirit in which\nCourts must view procedural deviances

FRONTIERS INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE ,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-17(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraa.Y. 2015-16 Frontiers Infra Projects India Vs. Income Tax Officer, Private Limited, Ward-17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcf 3873 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue By: Sri P. Suresh, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/09/2021 Order Per A. Mohan Alankamony, Am:

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 2. The assessee has raised eight grounds in its appeal and they are extracted herein below for reference: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate order passed by CIT (A) is erroneous to the extent the order is prejudicial to the interest