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

ACIT,CIRCLE-13(1), HYDERABAD vs. M/S SURESH PRODUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the ground of the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

delay of 183 days in filing of the CO is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The grounds raised by the Revenue reads as under : “1. The CIT(A) order is erroneous, considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The CIT(A) erred in allowing deduction U/s..80-IA, to the tune of Rs.13.49 lakhs

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

Bench: Us:

7 days involved in filing the present appeal. We have perused the application filed by the assessee firm explaining the aforesaid 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD vs. MADHAVA HYTECH ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

section 40a(ia) of the Act and shall attract disallowance. He, therefore, asked the assessee to furnish the objections if any. The assessee filed the following details: :- 3 -: ITA No..2088/Hyd/2017 & CO No. 19/Hyd/2019 M/s Madhava Hytech Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Hyd. 2.2 After examining the details, the AO observed that the assessee had remitted the tax deducted at source after

PADMASRI TOWNSHIPS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed, in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

delay is neither intentional nor deliberate on account of the reasons beyond assessee’s control. Hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst.Katiji & Ors [167 ITR 471] (SC) holds that the cause of substantial justice must prevail over all technical aspects and more so, when an assessee has proved satisfactorily that it was prevented from filing