PRYSMIAN CAVI E SISTEMI S.R.L,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT (INT,TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condone the delay of 2,996\ndays in filing the appeal and direct that the appeal be admitted for\nadjudication on merits.\n10. In addition to the aforesaid facts, the specific facts related to this appeal\nare that, pursuant to the directions of this Tribunal vide order dated\n25.07.2014 restoring the appeal arising from the assessment order dated\n29.03.2004

KREATIVE HOSTS ATRIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: S/Shri A .Mohan Alankamony & Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Kreative Hosts Atria Pvt Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), Ltd., C/O. P. Murali & Co., C,A, Hyderabad 6-3-655/2/3, Simajiguda, Hyderabad Pan/Gir No.Aadck 2362 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao , Ar Revenue By : Shri T.Sunil Goutham (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 11/10/ 2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 06/01/2022 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-2, Hyderabad Dated 28.5.2018 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 .

2 | 9 Assessment Year : 2013-14 be rejected. The assessee must show that he was diligent all along in taking appropriate steps and the delay was caused notwithstanding his due diligence and if he appears to be guilty of laches or negligence and does not take appropriate steps for pursuing his remedy then he must be prepared to have

PRYSMIAN CAVI E SISTEMI SRL INDIA PROJECT OFFICE (FORMERLY PIRELLI CAVI SISTEMI S P A INDIA PROJECT OFFICE),HYDERABAD vs. DCIT,( INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condone the delay of 2,996\ndays in filing the appeal and direct that the appeal be admitted for\nadjudication on merits.\n10. In addition to the aforesaid facts, the specific facts related to this appeal\nare that, pursuant to the directions of this Tribunal vide order dated\n25.07.2014 restoring the appeal arising from the assessment order dated\n29.03.2004

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

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

condonation of delay and carefully perused the reasons explained by the assessee. At the outset, it is noted that the impugned order was passed during the Covid Pandemic period and the Hon'ble Supreme Court while taking suo motto cognizance for extension of limitation in writ petition in Miscellaneous Appeal No.21/2022 extending the period of limitation up to 28/02/2022

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

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

condonation of delay and carefully perused the reasons explained by the assessee. At the outset, it is noted that the impugned order was passed during the Covid Pandemic period and the Hon'ble Supreme Court while taking suo motto cognizance for extension of limitation in writ petition in Miscellaneous Appeal No.21/2022 extending the period of limitation up to 28/02/2022

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

condonation of delay and carefully perused the reasons explained by the assessee. At the outset, it is noted that the impugned order was passed during the Covid Pandemic period and the Hon'ble Supreme Court while taking suo motto cognizance for extension of limitation in writ petition in Miscellaneous Appeal No.21/2022 extending the period of limitation up to 28/02/2022

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

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

condonation of delay and carefully perused the reasons explained by the assessee. At the outset, it is noted that the impugned order was passed during the Covid Pandemic period and the Hon'ble Supreme Court while taking suo motto cognizance for extension of limitation in writ petition in Miscellaneous Appeal No.21/2022 extending the period of limitation up to 28/02/2022

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

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

condonation of delay and carefully perused the reasons explained by the assessee. At the outset, it is noted that the impugned order was passed during the Covid Pandemic period and the Hon'ble Supreme Court while taking suo motto cognizance for extension of limitation in writ petition in Miscellaneous Appeal No.21/2022 extending the period of limitation up to 28/02/2022

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYD, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

condonation of delay and carefully perused the reasons explained by the assessee. At the outset, it is noted that the impugned order was passed during the Covid Pandemic period and the Hon'ble Supreme Court while taking suo motto cognizance for extension of limitation in writ petition in Miscellaneous Appeal No.21/2022 extending the period of limitation up to 28/02/2022

RATNA INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2012-13 Ratna Infrastructure Projects Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward –3(3), Private Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aadcr5836P. (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri B. Balakrishna, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.02.2025

40A(3) of the IT Act. Therefore, erred in confirming additions made by Assessing Officer in reassessment proceedings amounting to Rs.273,02,94,670/-. 5. The learned Commissioner ought to have appreciated that notice u/s 148 is issued on account of a letter from ADIT Kolkata, in respect of a transaction amounting to Rs.5,64,94,670/- and further

SRI SAI CONSTRUCTIONS,KARIMNAGAR vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-1, KARIMNAGAR

Bench: Us:

delay, which is not inordinate, and in all fairness condone the same. 3. The assessee firm has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds before us: 3 Sri Sai Constructions 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee firm, which is engaged in real estate business, had e-filed its return of income for the A.Y.2018- 19, declaring an income

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.:

2 of 11 ITA No 102 of 2022 Matrix Seafoods India Ltd as there was a delay of 930 days in filing the appeal. The assessee thereafter preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble Telangana High Court in ITTA No.105 of 2023. The execution portion of the order of the Hon’ble High Court is contained at para no.9

GAUTHAM KUMAR SUNKATA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-4(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.742/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Shri Gautam Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer Sunkata, Ward 4(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Cfwps7723F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: N O N E राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri K.N. Suresh Babu, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 29/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 02/09/2024 आदेश/Order

section 40a(ia) of the Income Tax and the same was added to the total income of the assessee. Penalty proceedings u/s 270A for under reporting of income were initiated on this issue separately. Page 2 of 4 ITA 742 of 2024 Gautam Kumar Sunkata 4. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT (A) with a delay

SRI SRI GRUHANIRMAN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA No. 94/Hyd/2019 and 532/Hyd/2020 are allowed in part and for statistical purpose and ITA No

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

40A(3) of the Act read with section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and towards suppressed of income basing on some estimation, apart from undisclosed cash payments and cash found and seized. 3. Aggrieved by the action of the learned Assessing Officer, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). By order dated 19/11/2018, Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. SRI SRI GRUHANIRMAN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA No. 94/Hyd/2019 and 532/Hyd/2020 are allowed in part and for statistical purpose and ITA No

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

40A(3) of the Act read with section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and towards suppressed of income basing on some estimation, apart from undisclosed cash payments and cash found and seized. 3. Aggrieved by the action of the learned Assessing Officer, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). By order dated 19/11/2018, Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed

SRI SRI GRUHANIRMAN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA No. 94/Hyd/2019 and 532/Hyd/2020 are allowed in part and for statistical purpose and ITA No

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

40A(3) of the Act read with section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and towards suppressed of income basing on some estimation, apart from undisclosed cash payments and cash found and seized. 3. Aggrieved by the action of the learned Assessing Officer, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). By order dated 19/11/2018, Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE -3(1), HYDERABAD vs. SRI SRI GRUHANIRMAN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA No. 94/Hyd/2019 and 532/Hyd/2020 are allowed in part and for statistical purpose and ITA No

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

40A(3) of the Act read with section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and towards suppressed of income basing on some estimation, apart from undisclosed cash payments and cash found and seized. 3. Aggrieved by the action of the learned Assessing Officer, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). By order dated 19/11/2018, Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed

SAI CHARAN TOWNSHIPS,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Sai Charan Townships, Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Plot No.111, Prashasan Income Tax, Nagar, Jubilee Hills, Central Circle – 3(3), Road No.12, Hyderabad Hyderabad. Pan : Acbfs3257J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr. Ar. Date Of Hearing: 31.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.08.2023 O R D E R Per Shri Laliet Kumar, J.M. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee, Feeling Aggrieved By The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 11, Hyderabad Invoking Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y 2017-18 On The Following Grounds :

section 40A(3) of the IT Act.” 2. The assessee has raised the additional grounds which read as under : “1. The learned Assessing Officer erroneously assumed that as per the ICDS (Income Computation and Disclosure Standard) w.e.f 01.04.2015, the assessee being a real estate developer mandatorily to follow percentage completion method, whereas, CBDT vide circular No.10/2017, dt: 23.03.2017, clarified that