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:

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

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, HYDERABAD vs. M/S. ENGINEERS REDDY P. LTD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing and adjudication. ITA Nos. 1139 & 1140/Hyd/2017 and ITA Nos. 215 & 216/Hyd/2017 by the assessee and revenue, for AY 2007-08 & 2008-09 respectively. 4. These are cross appeals, directed against a common order of CIT(A) – 11, Hyderabad, dated 30/08/2016. ITA No. 1139/Hyd/2017. 5. In this appeal, the assessee has raised

JANAPRIYA ENGINEERS SYNDICATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS JANAPRIYA ENGINEERS SYNDICATE PVT. LTD.),HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing and adjudication. ITA Nos. 1139 & 1140/Hyd/2017 and ITA Nos. 215 & 216/Hyd/2017 by the assessee and revenue, for AY 2007-08 & 2008-09 respectively. 4. These are cross appeals, directed against a common order of CIT(A) – 11, Hyderabad, dated 30/08/2016. ITA No. 1139/Hyd/2017. 5. In this appeal, the assessee has raised

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. JANAPRIYA ENGINEERS SYNDICATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing and adjudication. ITA Nos. 1139 & 1140/Hyd/2017 and ITA Nos. 215 & 216/Hyd/2017 by the assessee and revenue, for AY 2007-08 & 2008-09 respectively. 4. These are cross appeals, directed against a common order of CIT(A) – 11, Hyderabad, dated 30/08/2016. ITA No. 1139/Hyd/2017. 5. In this appeal, the assessee has raised

JANAPRIYA ENGINEERS SYNDICATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS JANAPRIYA ENGINEERS SYNDICATE PVT. LTD.),HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing and adjudication. ITA Nos. 1139 & 1140/Hyd/2017 and ITA Nos. 215 & 216/Hyd/2017 by the assessee and revenue, for AY 2007-08 & 2008-09 respectively. 4. These are cross appeals, directed against a common order of CIT(A) – 11, Hyderabad, dated 30/08/2016. ITA No. 1139/Hyd/2017. 5. In this appeal, the assessee has raised

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. JANAPRIYA ENGINEERS SYNDICATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing and adjudication. ITA Nos. 1139 & 1140/Hyd/2017 and ITA Nos. 215 & 216/Hyd/2017 by the assessee and revenue, for AY 2007-08 & 2008-09 respectively. 4. These are cross appeals, directed against a common order of CIT(A) – 11, Hyderabad, dated 30/08/2016. ITA No. 1139/Hyd/2017. 5. In this appeal, the assessee has raised

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, HYDERABAD vs. M/S. ENGINEERS REDDY P. LTD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing and adjudication. ITA Nos. 1139 & 1140/Hyd/2017 and ITA Nos. 215 & 216/Hyd/2017 by the assessee and revenue, for AY 2007-08 & 2008-09 respectively. 4. These are cross appeals, directed against a common order of CIT(A) – 11, Hyderabad, dated 30/08/2016. ITA No. 1139/Hyd/2017. 5. In this appeal, the assessee has raised

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

DEEPIKA INFRATECH PVT.LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

condoning the inordinate delay of 653 days, for which no cogent reason has been given. 5. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material facts on record. The assessee has pleaded before the CIT(A) and before us that he has filed appeal before

M/S DEEPIKA INFRATECH PVT LTD.,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

condoning the inordinate delay of 653 days, for which no cogent reason has been given. 5. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material facts on record. The assessee has pleaded before the CIT(A) and before us that he has filed appeal before

DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, HYDERABAD vs. M/S DEEPIKA INFRATECH PVT LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

condoning the inordinate delay of 653 days, for which no cogent reason has been given. 5. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material facts on record. The assessee has pleaded before the CIT(A) and before us that he has filed appeal before

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

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

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

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