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

condone delay\nin filing Form 10B.\n11. Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not\nappreciating that the entire amount of Rs 20,97,19,672/-has been\nduly expended towards the objects of the trust on Revenue account\nwhich is clearly evident from the Return of Income filed.\n12.1. Without prejudice to other grounds

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

condone delay\nin filing Form 10B.\n11. Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not\nappreciating that the entire amount of Rs 20,97,19,672/-has been\nduly expended towards the objects of the trust on Revenue account\nwhich is clearly evident from the Return of Income filed.\n12.1. Without prejudice to other grounds

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

285 days in\npreferring the appeal could not be condoned. It was held that the\ncondonation of delay was not justified on facts and evidence of the\ncase. As rightly pointed out that the Rules of limitation are based on\nprinciples of sound public policy and principles of equity. Though there\nis no presumption that the delay is occasioned deliberately

GUDDENNAGARI RAMAKRISHNA,KURNOOL vs. ITO., WARD-1, KURNOOL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed\nin limine

condone the delay.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections": [ "147", "148", "142(1)", "69A", "144", "144B", "5" ], "issues": "Whether the delay of 285

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

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

condonation of delay in filing of the appeal or petition cannot be allowed. In the present case, it is a dispute between the State in respect of a tax liability which is civil in nature and the same cannot be equated with the dispute between two parties and therefore, in our considered view, the case laws relied upon

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

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

condonation of delay in filing of the appeal or petition cannot be allowed. In the present case, it is a dispute between the State in respect of a tax liability which is civil in nature and the same cannot be equated with the dispute between two parties and therefore, in our considered view, the case laws relied upon

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

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

condonation of delay in filing of the appeal or petition cannot be allowed. In the present case, it is a dispute between the State in respect of a tax liability which is civil in nature and the same cannot be equated with the dispute between two parties and therefore, in our considered view, the case laws relied upon

KRANTHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,BHADRACHALLAM vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our observations given hereinabove

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A).

condone such delay and therefore, upheld the disallowance of Rs.10,72,66,472/- and dismissed the appeal. 6. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before us. 7. The learned counsel for the assessee Shri DLS Narasimha Rao, CA, submitted that, the denial of exemption under Section 11 of the Income

SHAKTI HORMANN PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

285/-, disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act at Rs. 24,000/-, disallowance under section 43B of the Act at Rs. 1,00,01,378/- and Rs. 4,22,647/-. 3. Assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) referred to the submissions made by the assessee and also to the decisions

SHAKTI HORMANN PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

285/-, disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act at Rs. 24,000/-, disallowance under section 43B of the Act at Rs. 1,00,01,378/- and Rs. 4,22,647/-. 3. Assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) referred to the submissions made by the assessee and also to the decisions

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

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

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE2(1), HYDERABAD vs. MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.No.

delay in filing this appeal 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 company filed its return of income for the A.V. 2017-18 originally on 31.10.2017 admitting total income

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.No.

delay in filing this appeal 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 company filed its return of income for the A.V. 2017-18 originally on 31.10.2017 admitting total income

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.No.

delay in filing this appeal 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 company filed its return of income for the A.V. 2017-18 originally on 31.10.2017 admitting total income

CH MARTHANDA RAO & CO,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD - 14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the order passed by the CIT(A) is modified in terms of our aforesaid observations, and the appeal filed by the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our afore...

Bench: Us:

condoning the delay involved in filing of the present appeal before us. 11. On merits, the Ld. A.R submitted that the CIT(A) had erred in merely setting aside the AO’s order without considering the merits of the case, viz. (i). that the assessee firm had no legal existence at the time of assessment; (ii). that the incomes/receipts assessed

CH MARTHANDA RAO AND CO,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD - 14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the order passed by the CIT(A) is modified in terms of our aforesaid observations, and the appeal filed by the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our afore...

Bench: Us:

condoning the delay involved in filing of the present appeal before us. 11. On merits, the Ld. A.R submitted that the CIT(A) had erred in merely setting aside the AO’s order without considering the merits of the case, viz. (i). that the assessee firm had no legal existence at the time of assessment; (ii). that the incomes/receipts assessed