TIBERWALA ELECTRONICS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

delay in filing the appeal does not merit condonation and the appeal is treated to be filed late with reference to the provisions of section 249(3) of the Act. The main grievance of the assessee in this appeal is in respect of the disallowance under section 36(1)(va

TIBERWALA ELECTRONICS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

delay in filing the appeal does not merit condonation and the appeal is treated to be filed late with reference to the provisions of section 249(3) of the Act. The main grievance of the assessee in this appeal is in respect of the disallowance under section 36(1)(va

SREE KRISHNA AUTOMOTIVES HYDERABAD PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -3 (1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Sree Krishna Automotives Vs. Dy. Cit, Hyderabad (P) Ltd Circle 3(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aakcs5353H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca Revenue By: Sri K.P.R.R. Murty, Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 14/07/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 1.10.2021 Of The Learned Cit (A)- Nfac, Relating To A.Y.2019-20. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, However, These All Relate To The Order Of The Cit(A)/Nfac In Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.30,53,317/- Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 36 Of The I.T. Act On A/C Of Delayed Payment Of Pf & Esi.

delay in filing of this appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 4. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of automobile dealership business. It filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs.14,99,78,293/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1

NARENDER AGARWAL,M/S JR FORGINGS 39/A/1 ,IDA BALANAGAR HYDERABAD 500037 ,TELANGANA INDIA vs. ITO WARD-11(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Narender Agarwal Vs. Ito, Ward-11(3) Prop M/S. Jr Forgings Hyderabad 39/A/1, Ida Balanagar Hyderabad-500 037 Pan : Aampa4460G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Krishnan Revenue By: Shri T.Sunil Goutam Date Of Hearing: 19.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.05.2022 O R D E R Per Shri Rama Kanta Panda, A.M. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.11.2021 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi For The Ay 2019-20. 2. There Is A Delay Of 25 Days In Filing Of This Appeal By The Assessee For Which Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition Along With The Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Contents Of The Condonation Application Filed Along With The Affidavit, The Delay In Filing Of This Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2 3. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however these relate to the order of ld.CIT(A), NFAC in sustaining the adjustment of Rs. 1,42,980/-by the CPC, Bangalore on account of delayed payment of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI. 4. Facts

DARSHAN VIJAYSINH BHATIA,HYDERABAD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEAL, FACELESS CENTER DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Sri S.S. Godara

condone the slight delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 4. The assessee has raised several grounds in his appeals for both the AYs 2018-19 and 2019-20 which are identical in nature however, the crux of the issue is that: “The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming

DARSHAN V BHATIA,HYDERABAD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEAL, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Sri S.S. Godara

condone the slight delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 4. The assessee has raised several grounds in his appeals for both the AYs 2018-19 and 2019-20 which are identical in nature however, the crux of the issue is that: “The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming

LSC STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 16(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Lsc Steels Private Limited Vs. The Deputy Commissioner 5-2-196/1, Of Income Tax, Near Ravi Weigh Bridge Circle – 16(1), Distillery Road Hyderabad. Secunderabad Hyderabad-500003 Pan : Aabcl2762J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sanjay Mutha Revenue By: Shri Rohit Mujumdar Date Of Hearing: 19.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.05.2022 O R D E R Per Shri Rama Kanta Panda, A.M. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.11.2021 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi For The Ay 2017-18. 2. There Is A Delay Of 47 Days In Filing Of This Appeal By The Assessee, For Which Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Application Along With An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay. After Hearing Both The Sides, The Delay In Filing Of This Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing.

condoned the appeal is admitted for hearing. 3. The only ground raised by the assessee reads as under:- 2 ITA 56/Hyd/2022 1. The commissioner ought to have allowed employee contribution remitted of Rs. 1,00,825/- after the due date with minor delay but paid before the filing of income tax return u/s. 139(1). 4. Facts of the case

THE WARANGAL DISTRICT COOPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LIMITED,HANAMKONDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.364/Hyd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2021-22) The Warangal District Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Cooperative Central Bank Income Tax, Limited, Hanamkonda, Circle-3(1), Warangal. Hyderabad. Pan: Aabtt3137G (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 11/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 14/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M:

condonation of the delay in filing of “Form 10IF”, and that no relief in respect of interest under sections 234A, 234B or 234C shall be admissible, in line with the CBDT order dated 01.09.2025. 14. Apropos the disallowance by the AO of the delayed deposit of the employees share of contribution towards PF/ESI u/s 36(1)(va

C2D SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ,WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year: 2019-20

condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the NFAC in sustaining the disallowance of Rs.3,23,096/- for the delayed Page 1 of 4 ITA No 217 of 2022 C2D Software Private Ltd Hyderabad payment of employees’ contribution towards

GANESH SAND BLASTING WORKS,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 11(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year: 2019-20

condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the CIT(A)/ NFAC in sustaining the disallowance of Rs.2,05,549/- by the Assessing Officer u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act on Page 1

SRI POTTI SRIRAMULU NELLORE DIST CO-OP CENTRAL BANK LIMITED,,NELLORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NELLORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore Vs. Acit,Circle-1, Nellore Dist Co-Op Central Bank 24-2-438, 1St Floor, Limited Gt Road 16-2-249, Central Bank Nellore-524001 Building Near Mahatma Gandhi Statue, Trunk Road Nellore Andhra Pradesh-524 001

condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 3. Although, a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however these all relate to the order of the NFAC in sustaining the disallowances made by the AO amounting to Rs. 33,34,014/- being delay in deposit of Employee’s contribution to PF. 4. Facts of the case

NARAYANSINTHY GAJENDRA PATRO,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 13(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

condone the delay of 326 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 5. The assessee has pleaded the following grounds in the instant appeal : 1. “The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ("CIT(A)") erred in upholding the Learned Centralized Processing Centre ("Ld.CPC") Order, which is bad in law and against

GEM MOTORS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Gem Motors India (P) Ltd, Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Kondapur, Hyderabad Circle 2(2) Pan:Aaccg7660H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/02/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 2.12.2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2018-19. 2. There Is A Delay Of 6 Days In Filing Of This Appeal By The Assessee For Which The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Application Along With An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Contents Of The Condonation Application & After Hearing The Learned Dr, The Delay In Filing Of The Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

delay in filing of the appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. Page 1 of 4 3. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the learned CIT (A)-NFAC in confirming the order of the CPC Bengaluru wherein an amount of Rs.47

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.

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 of Rs. 37,15,65,518/- and filed a revised return on 30.03.2019 revising the 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.

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 of Rs. 37,15,65,518/- and filed a revised return on 30.03.2019 revising the 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.

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 of Rs. 37,15,65,518/- and filed a revised return on 30.03.2019 revising the total income

AGRAWALA SWEETS AND RESTAURANT,HYDERABAD vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

condone the delay and proceed to hear the matter on merits. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the Learned Assessing Officer made a disallowance u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act for the delayed payments of ESI/PF contribution of the employees by the employer, but which was paid before the due date of filing the return of income u/s.139

CHEDEDEEPU SRINIVAS,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

delay of 41 days in filing of this appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal before the Tribunal: “1. The impugned order of the learned Assessing Officer in so far as it is against the appellant is opposed to law, weight of evidence, natural justice, probabilities, facts

UNITED RAIL ROAD CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

condoning the delay, observed that “since the issue under appeal is a settled issue, the AO may consider the issue u/s 154 after considering the necessary supporting evidences filed by the appellant allow the same as per law.” We have also gone through the Tax Audit Report i.e. Form No. 3CD for both the years at Sl.No