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

condonation of delay before the Pr. CIT. Further, it is also held as a settled proposition of law that even if the benefit of secs.11 and 12 of the Act is denied, the gross receipt of the assessee cannot be assessed to tax without allowing the expenditure incurred by the assessee towards charitable purpose. In other words, in case

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

condonation of delay before the Pr. CIT. Further, it is also held as a settled proposition of law that even if the benefit of secs.11 and 12 of the Act is denied, the gross receipt of the assessee cannot be assessed to tax without allowing the expenditure incurred by the assessee towards charitable purpose. In other words, in case

SRI SOMESHWARA LAXMI NARASIMHA SWAMY TEMPLE PALAKURTHY,WARANGAL vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1408/Hyd/2024 To 1410/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Narasimha Swamy Temple Exemption Palakurthy Ward-1(4) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.141/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2024-25) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Commissioner Of Narasimha Swamy Temple Income Tax Palakurthy (Exemptions) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 22/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Three Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, All Dated 08.10.2024 For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19 Respectively & Order Dated 26.02.2024 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [“Ld.Cit(E)”], Whereby The Application Of The Assessee For Registration U/S 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) Was Rejected.

condone the delay of 13 days, 11 days and 14 days in filing these appeals before the Ld.CIT(A) for the A.Y. 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2018-19 respectively. 7. On the merits of the issue, the Ld.AR of the assessee has submitted that the AO has assessed the entire hundi collection/donations, without allowing the corresponding expenditure incurred

SRI SOMESHWARA LAXMI NARASIMHA SWAMY TEMPLE PALAKURTHY,WARANGAL vs. ITO., EXEMPTION WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1408/Hyd/2024 To 1410/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Narasimha Swamy Temple Exemption Palakurthy Ward-1(4) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.141/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2024-25) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Commissioner Of Narasimha Swamy Temple Income Tax Palakurthy (Exemptions) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 22/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Three Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, All Dated 08.10.2024 For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19 Respectively & Order Dated 26.02.2024 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [“Ld.Cit(E)”], Whereby The Application Of The Assessee For Registration U/S 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) Was Rejected.

condone the delay of 13 days, 11 days and 14 days in filing these appeals before the Ld.CIT(A) for the A.Y. 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2018-19 respectively. 7. On the merits of the issue, the Ld.AR of the assessee has submitted that the AO has assessed the entire hundi collection/donations, without allowing the corresponding expenditure incurred

SRI SOMESHWARA LAXMI NARASIMHA SWAMY TEMPLE PALAKURTHY,WARANGAL vs. ITO., EXEMPTION, WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1408/Hyd/2024 To 1410/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Narasimha Swamy Temple Exemption Palakurthy Ward-1(4) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.141/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2024-25) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Commissioner Of Narasimha Swamy Temple Income Tax Palakurthy (Exemptions) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 22/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Three Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, All Dated 08.10.2024 For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19 Respectively & Order Dated 26.02.2024 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [“Ld.Cit(E)”], Whereby The Application Of The Assessee For Registration U/S 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) Was Rejected.

condone the delay of 13 days, 11 days and 14 days in filing these appeals before the Ld.CIT(A) for the A.Y. 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2018-19 respectively. 7. On the merits of the issue, the Ld.AR of the assessee has submitted that the AO has assessed the entire hundi collection/donations, without allowing the corresponding expenditure incurred

SRI SOMESHWARA LAXMI NARASIMHA SWAMY TEMPLE PALAKURTHY,WARANGAL vs. ITO., EXEMPTION, WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1408/Hyd/2024 To 1410/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Narasimha Swamy Temple Exemption Palakurthy Ward-1(4) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.141/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2024-25) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Commissioner Of Narasimha Swamy Temple Income Tax Palakurthy (Exemptions) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 22/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Three Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, All Dated 08.10.2024 For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19 Respectively & Order Dated 26.02.2024 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [“Ld.Cit(E)”], Whereby The Application Of The Assessee For Registration U/S 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) Was Rejected.

condone the delay of 13 days, 11 days and 14 days in filing these appeals before the Ld.CIT(A) for the A.Y. 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2018-19 respectively. 7. On the merits of the issue, the Ld.AR of the assessee has submitted that the AO has assessed the entire hundi collection/donations, without allowing the corresponding expenditure incurred

SRI SOMESHWARA LAXMI NARASIMHA SWAMY TEMPLE PALAKURTHY,WARANGAL vs. ITO., WARD-3, WARANGAL.

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.No.326/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Sri Someshwara Laxmi Narasimha Swamy Temple, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-3, Palakurthy, Warangal – 506001 Warangal – 506 252. Telangana. Pan Aagas8382Q (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वधिध/Assessee By : Ca Ka Sai Prasad िधजस् व द्वधिध/Revenue By : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधिीख/Date Of Hearing: 29.01.2026 घोषणध की तधिीख/Pronouncement: 06.02.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.02.2024 Of The Learned Cit(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short “Nfac], Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2

275 days in filing the appeal subject to cost of Rs.1000/- to be deposited in the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund. Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the earlier decision of this Tribunal, we take a lenient to condone the delay of 301 days in filing the present appeal subject to cost

MOHAMMAD HABEEB UDDIN,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.08/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Mohammad Habeeb Uddin, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 11-2-323-Cross Bazaar, Ward-7(1), Ghat, Hyderabad, Hyderabad. Telangana – 500004. Pan: Aaqph8462F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri Rajesh Vaishnav, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Posu Babu Alli, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 20/08/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 08/10/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Dated 30.12.2019 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

Section 115BBE of the Act without considering the legal arguments and factual evidence submitted by the Assessee. 4. The Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in upholding the order passed Ld. by AO initiating penalty u/s 271AAC and imputing interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 5. Without prejudice to the above, it is humbly prayed that

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), HYDERABAD

275/- (Rs.13,600/- as per order under section 154, dated 19/04/2022), the CIT(A) observed that as the assessee company had not submitted any details for substantiating its claim that there was no short deduction or short payment/collection of tax, therefore, the said claim being devoid and bereft of any substance was liable to be rejected. 10. Apropos the challenge

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee company, being devoid and bereft of any substance, is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1236 & 1237/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2021-22 & 2022-23) Vivimed Labs Limited, Vs. Dcit, Hyderabad. Central Circle-3(4), Pan: Aaacv6060A Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 05/01/2026 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order

275/- (Rs.13,600/- as per order under section 154, dated 19/04/2022), the CIT(A) observed that as the assessee company had not submitted any details for substantiating its claim that there was no short deduction or short payment/collection of tax, therefore, the said claim being devoid and bereft of any substance was liable to be rejected. 10. Apropos the challenge

DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1),, HYDERABAD vs. UNITED DEVELOPER, HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objections file d by the assessee firm in A

Bench: Us As A Cross-Objector. Since Common Issues Are Involved In The Captioned Appeals & Cross-Objections, Therefore, The Same Have Been Taken Up & Disposed Of By A Consolidated Order. We Shall First Take Up The Appeal Filed By The Revenue & The Cross- Objection Of The Assessee Firm For A.Y.2016-17 & The Order Therein Passed Shall Apply Mutatis Mutandis For The Purpose Of Disposing Of The Other Appeal & Cross-Objection.

condonation of the delay involved in filing the appeal. 20. As the assessee firm vide its cross objection has assailed the validity of the addition of Rs. 9.45 crores (supra) made by the AO on account of the alleged unaccounted sale consideration received by the assessee firm in cash, therefore, we deem it apposite to first deal with the said

DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. UNITED DEVELOPER, HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objections file d by the assessee firm in A

Bench: Us As A Cross-Objector. Since Common Issues Are Involved In The Captioned Appeals & Cross-Objections, Therefore, The Same Have Been Taken Up & Disposed Of By A Consolidated Order. We Shall First Take Up The Appeal Filed By The Revenue & The Cross- Objection Of The Assessee Firm For A.Y.2016-17 & The Order Therein Passed Shall Apply Mutatis Mutandis For The Purpose Of Disposing Of The Other Appeal & Cross-Objection.

condonation of the delay involved in filing the appeal. 20. As the assessee firm vide its cross objection has assailed the validity of the addition of Rs. 9.45 crores (supra) made by the AO on account of the alleged unaccounted sale consideration received by the assessee firm in cash, therefore, we deem it apposite to first deal with the said

ITO, WARD-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. ARKA PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.58/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Income Tax Officer Vs. Arka Properties (P) Ltd Ward 1 (1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafca7411H (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. M. Narmada, Cit(Dr) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate H Srinivasulu, सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 17/04/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated, 23/11/2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Y. 2015-16. 2. There Is A Delay Of 1 Day By The Revenue In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal & The Revenue Has Filed An Affidavit Explaining The Cause Of Delay. We Have Heard The Learned Dr As Well As The Learned Ar On The Condonation Of Delay. The Learned Ar Has Not Objected For Condonation Of Delay Of One Day In Filing

delay of one day in filing the present appeal is condoned. 3. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: 4. The learned DR has submitted that the assessee sold the agricultural land situated at Village Kapashera, Delhi for a consideration of Rs.61.25 crores but, did not offer the capital gain Page

RAAJASEKAR JEEVITHA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Rajasekar Jeevitha, Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O.P. Murali & Co., Income Tax, Chartered Accountants, Central Circle – 2(3), 6-3-655/2/3, Hyderabad. Somajiguda, Hyderabad - 500082 Pan : Aagpj7813A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Shri A.P. Babu, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing: 05.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.10.2023

condone delay) and termination of proceedings.” Applying the said decision in the present case, the time limit for passing penalty order u/s 272A(I)(d) of the Act was 06.06.2020 as per the provisions of section 275

NEERAJ KUMAR AGARWAL ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (e) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have followed the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of ITO v. Volkart Brothers and Others, 82 ITR 50 (S.C.) with regard to mistake apparent from record that qualities for an action

SURENDRA BABU GUDAPATI,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2014-15 Surendra Babu Gudapati, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. International Taxation – 1, Hyderabad Pan – Ahxpg 7295D Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Manoj Kumar Daga Revenue By: Shri Dinesh Paduchuri Date Of Hearing: 07/05/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/05/2019 O R D E R

condone the delay and admit the same for hearing and adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case are, the assessee, a non-resident individual, filed his return of income for the AY 2014-15 on 2 I.T.A. No. 233/Hyd/19 Surendra Babu Gudapati, Hyd. 30/07/2014 declaring income of Rs. 7,36,680/-, which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income

SHARANAM AGARWAL,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

section 69A have no application and that the addition of Rs. 12,00,725/- should have been deleted. 6. Any other ground / grounds that may be urged a the time of hearing.” 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his return of income for AY 2017-18 on 02/08/2017 declaring an income of Rs. 4,95,900/-. The return

MATRIX SEA FOODS INDIA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT (OSD) WARD-16(4), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S Matrix Sea Foods Vs. Acit ( Osd ) India Limited, Hyderabad Ward 16(4) Pan:Aaecm4113H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 30/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

condoned the delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal and restored the matter to the file of the Tribunal for adjudication on merits, subject to payment of cost of Rs.25,000/- to the Telangana State Legal Services Authority within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. In this regard