PARANJYOTHI THOTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. Cit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Ajqpt7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/02/2026 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 09/09/2025 & 25/09/2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Page 1 Of 33

Section 249(3)of the Act is discretionary in nature and the assessee cannot seek condonation of delay under this provision as a matter of right but has to satisfy the FAA by explaining the sufficient cause for the delay. (v) Just because there is merit in the appeal filed by the assessee, any amount of delay, however, negligently caused

KUMUD BAJAJ,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, KHAMMAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.782/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Kumud Bajaj, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward-1, Pan: Acepb3914A Khammam. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Smt. S. Sandhya, Advocate राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Shri K. Vamsi Krishna, Sr. Ar

section 249(2) of the Act, hence the Delay cannot be condoned, and appeal cannot be admitted for adjudication hence rendered as inadmissible. 4

ADARSH MEDICAL HALL,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-7(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.287/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Adarsh Medical Hall Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward-7(1) [Pan :Aagfa5186R] Hyderabad

4. After hearing both the sides, we condone delay in filing the appeal and admit appeal for disposal in the interest of justice. 3 Adarsh Medical Hall 5. The brief facts of the case are that on the basis of data analytics and information gathered during the phase of online verification under ‘Operation Clean Money’, the Income Tax Department gathered

VASAVI CLUB,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

condonation of delay and the submissions made by the assessee, and after taking note of the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re [2022] 134 taxmann.com 307 (SC), held that, even after excluding the Covid- 19 period, there was an effective delay of 526 days in filing the appeal

MALIREDDI SRINATH,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), HDYERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

condonation of delay and the submissions made by the assessee, held that the appeal was filed 4 Malreddy Srinath beyond the period prescribed under Section 249

KARIMNAGAR MILK PRODUCER COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, KARIMNAGAR

section 249 of the Act, and after condoning the delay disposed of\nthe appeal on merits. Also, we find that the CIT(A) had though\nobserved that the explanation of the assessee company regarding the\ndelay in filing the appeal before him was being rejected as it was not\ncorroborated with supporting documentary evidence, but we find that\nthere

REVANTH REDDY ANUMALA,BANJARA HILLS vs. A.C.I.T CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

249 of Income Tax Act, which provides powers to the Id. Commissioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 10 ITA.No.650/Hyd./2023 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon'ble High Court as well as before

NIRAJITA MITRA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-12(4), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

4 of section 270AA of the Act either accepting or rejecting the 5 application of the assessee. In our view, the power of condoning the delay vests with all the quasi judicial authorities and judicial authorities in case a reasonable cause has shown by the assessee or the plaintiff or person(s) for not filing the requisite application within

PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED CHENNARAOPET,WARANGAL vs. ITO, WARD-1, WARANGAL

Bench: Us:

4 Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society Limited mentioned in the Column No. 15 of the Form No. 35 that the delay condonation petition along with affidavit will be filed along with written submission. However, no such application for condoning the above delay has been uploaded till date. 2. Hence, you are given last opportunity to rectify the above defect in your

ARYA VYSYA TRUST,VIKARABAD vs. ITO., WARD-1, VIKARABAD

Bench: Us:

section 249 of the Act, was vested with the discretion to condone the delay involved in the appeal filed by the assessee-trust before him, therefore, considering the totality of the facts involved in the present case, he ought to have taken a sympathetic and lenient view, specifically when the present assessee trust is stated to be a small organization

RAMULU BANDI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-13(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Us: Ramulu Bandi, Hyderabad.

249 of the Act had rightly refused to condone the same. We thus, finding no infirmity in the well-reasoned order of the CIT(A), uphold the same. 15. Before parting, we may herein observe that in case the delay involved in filing the appeal would not have been inordinate, and supported by justifiable reason, then, the same

RAMULU BANDI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-13(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Us: Ramulu Bandi, Hyderabad.

249 of the Act had rightly refused to condone the same. We thus, finding no infirmity in the well-reasoned order of the CIT(A), uphold the same. 15. Before parting, we may herein observe that in case the delay involved in filing the appeal would not have been inordinate, and supported by justifiable reason, then, the same

RAMULU BANDI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-13(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Us: Ramulu Bandi, Hyderabad.

249 of the Act had rightly refused to condone the same. We thus, finding no infirmity in the well-reasoned order of the CIT(A), uphold the same. 15. Before parting, we may herein observe that in case the delay involved in filing the appeal would not have been inordinate, and supported by justifiable reason, then, the same

VENGALA RAO MADALA,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.193/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Vengala Rao Madala, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-11(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan:Aqnpm6758J (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 22/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Vengala Rao Madala (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 04.10.2023 For The A.Y. 2017-18. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noticed That There Is A Delay Of 403 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A

4 Ward-2, Ambikapur in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 26310- 26311/2024, dated 31.01.2025 has held that while deciding a condonation petition, a liberal and judicial approach should be adopted, particularly when the delay is attributable to circumstances beyond the control of the litigant and there is no mala fide intention. Therefore, considering the medical condition of the assessee during

SURESH SAMAT HUF,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

4. Per contra, learned DR drew the attention of the Bench to Para 6 to 6.3 to the order of the CIT (A)-NFAC which reads as under: “6 In respect of the request for the condonation of delay of 2892 days (after excluded 30 days as per section 249

SURESH SAMAT HUF,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

4. Per contra, learned DR drew the attention of the Bench to Para 6 to 6.3 to the order of the CIT (A)-NFAC which reads as under: “6 In respect of the request for the condonation of delay of 2892 days (after excluded 30 days as per section 249

SURESH SAMAT HUF,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, WARD-10(1),, HYDERABAD

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

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

4. Per contra, learned DR drew the attention of the Bench to Para 6 to 6.3 to the order of the CIT (A)-NFAC which reads as under: “6 In respect of the request for the condonation of delay of 2892 days (after excluded 30 days as per section 249

SURESH SAMAT HUF,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

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

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

4. Per contra, learned DR drew the attention of the Bench to Para 6 to 6.3 to the order of the CIT (A)-NFAC which reads as under: “6 In respect of the request for the condonation of delay of 2892 days (after excluded 30 days as per section 249