RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.972 & 973/Hyd/2024

264/- which was spent for the aims and that there is no excess of receipts over expenditure either to be taxed or to be exempted. 5.2. Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the assessee has duly complied with the provisions of Sec 11 of the Act in all the previous years

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.972 & 973/Hyd/2024

264/- which was spent for the aims and that there is no excess of receipts over expenditure either to be taxed or to be exempted. 5.2. Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the assessee has duly complied with the provisions of Sec 11 of the Act in all the previous years

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.972 & 973/Hyd/2024

264/- which was spent for the aims and that there is no excess of receipts over expenditure either to be taxed or to be exempted. Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the assessee has duly complied with the provisions of Sec 11 of the Act in all the previous years and that

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

264\n(Madras)].\n\n5.5 In this regard, it will be relevant to examine how the Courts have dealt with\nsimilar cases. A reference may be made to decision of Hon'ble High Court of Madras\nin the case of Madhu Dadha vs. ACIT reported 317 ITR 458 (Mad); (2010) 186\nTaxmann 8 (Madras). In this case, there was delay

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

section 264 provide for limitation of one year for the exercise of this revisional power, whether suo motu, or at the instance of the assessee. Power is also conferred on the CIT to condone delay

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

section 264 provide for limitation of one year for the exercise of this revisional power, whether suo motu, or at the instance of the assessee. Power is also conferred on the CIT to condone delay

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

section 264 provide for limitation of one year for the exercise of this revisional power, whether suo motu, or at the instance of the assessee. Power is also conferred on the CIT to condone delay

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

section 264 provide for limitation of one year for the exercise of this revisional power, whether suo motu, or at the instance of the assessee. Power is also conferred on the CIT to condone delay

VAGDEVI REDDY TANDUR,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -5(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

condoning the delay. In this regard, we note that the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT reported in 280 ITR 357 has held that “3. The Supreme Court in Vedabai v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798held as under: "In exercising discretion under section 5 of the Limitation

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

section 264 provide for limitation of one year for the exercise of this revisional power, whether suo motu, or at the instance of the assessee. Power is also conferred on the CIT to condone delay

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

section 264 provide for limitation of one year for the exercise of this revisional power, whether suo motu, or at the instance of the assessee. Power is also conferred on the CIT to condone delay

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

section 264 provide for limitation of one year for the exercise of this revisional power, whether suo motu, or at the instance of the assessee. Power is also conferred on the CIT to condone delay

SRISAILA KSHETRA YOGI VEMA REDDY NITHYANNADANA SATRAM,KURNOOL vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, TIRUPATI

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Srisaila Kshetra Yogi Vema Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Reddy Nityannadana Satram, Tirupati. Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh. Pan : Aadts7734G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Gbs Maitreya Revenue By: Ms. Reema Yadav. Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.01.2023

condoning the delay. In this regard, I note that the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT reported in 280 ITR 357 has held that “3. The Supreme Court in Vedabai v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798held as under:"In exercising discretion under section 5 of the Limitation

KARUNAKAR REDDY SUDHAKAR DUVVURU,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-6(1) , HYDERABAD

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2009-10 Sri Karunakar Reddy Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Sudhakar Duvvuru, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Ahcpd0573C. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri A.V. Raghuram. Revenue By: Sri Rohit Majumdar For Cit Dr Yvst Sai Date Of Hearing: 02/03/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 04/03/2022

condoning the corresponding delay in filing the lower appeal of more than 3 years for want of reasonable explanation in support thereof. I interalia notice in this factual backdrop that the Assessing Officer had framed his section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 assessment in issue on 31.08.2016 followed by the assessee’s section 264

SANGHI TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERBAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

264 (P&H HC)], it was held that estimation at 8% on gross receipts is valid when books are not reliable. Likewise, in CIT v. Banwarilal Banshidhar [(1998) 229 ITR 229 (AII HC)], it was held that once estimation is made. it is a valid method of computation where books are unreliable. Therefore, the estimation made

QUARTZ INFRA AND ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. SHRI B. R. RAMESH DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE16-(1), HYDERABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.98/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Quartz Infra & Engineering P.Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-16(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aaacq1546N] अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Sri Pavan Kumar Chakrapani, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Sri Kumar Pranav, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 30 /07/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement On: 27/08/2024 आदेश / Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, J.M: Aggrieved By The Order Dated 27/02/2020 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (“Learned Cit(A)”)-4, Hyderabad In The Case Of M/S Quartz Infra & Engineering Private Ltd.(“The Assessee”) For The Assessment Year 2011-12, Assessee Preferred This Appeal, With A Delay Of 264 Days.

264 days. 2. It can be seen from the record that there is a delay in preferring this appeal and the reason for the delay in filing the appeal is attributed to the pandemic. As a matter of fact, though the learned DR does not concede to condone the delay, there is no denial of the fact that

SPANDANA SPHOORTY FINANCIAL LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Laxmi Prasao Sahuassessment Year: 2011-12 Spandana Sphoorty Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Financials Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Hyderabao. Hyderabao. Pan – Aaics 6213N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs Spandana Sphoorty Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Financials Ltd., Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan – Aaics 6213N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri G.V.N. Hari Revenue By: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai Date Of Hearing: 10/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04/10/2021 O R D E R Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.:

delay is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to the circumstances beyond its control. The same stands condoned. Case is now taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee, M/s Spandana spoorty Financial Services Ltd. is a company engaged in the business of 'Micro-finance'. The assessee company filed its return

DCIT, CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. SPANDANA SPHOORTHY FINANCIAL LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Laxmi Prasao Sahuassessment Year: 2011-12 Spandana Sphoorty Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Financials Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Hyderabao. Hyderabao. Pan – Aaics 6213N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs Spandana Sphoorty Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Financials Ltd., Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan – Aaics 6213N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri G.V.N. Hari Revenue By: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai Date Of Hearing: 10/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04/10/2021 O R D E R Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.:

delay is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to the circumstances beyond its control. The same stands condoned. Case is now taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee, M/s Spandana spoorty Financial Services Ltd. is a company engaged in the business of 'Micro-finance'. The assessee company filed its return