DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. BRAMHANI INDUSTRIES LIMITED, JAMMALAMADUGU, YSR DIST., YSR DIST.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Sri Chandra Mohan Garga.Y. 2010-11 Bramhani Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Jammalamadugu. Circle-1(3), Pan: Aadcb 1666 M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Bramhani Industries Circle-1(2), Limited, Hyderabad. Jammalamadugu. Pan: Aadcb 1666 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri Gowtham Jain Revenue By Sri K.V. Aravind, Sr. Standing Counsel For Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/01/2022 Order

condone the delay in filing the appeal however, confirmed the order of the Ld. AO on merits by relying on the second remand report obtained from the Ld. AO dated 8/11/2016 and by disregarding the first remand report dated 17/3/2015. Submitted by the Ld.AO. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. Revenue Authorities, the assessee is in appeal before

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. SRK CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.No.389/Hyd

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

condonation of huge delay a 445 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the appeal filed by the appellant is not maintainable and, therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant/assessee is dismissed as un- admitted. 11. In the result, appeal ITA.No.359/Hyd./2022 for the assessment year 2016-2017 is dismissed

SRK CONSTRUCTIONS AND PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1),, HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.No.389/Hyd

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

condonation of huge delay a 445 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the appeal filed by the appellant is not maintainable and, therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant/assessee is dismissed as un- admitted. 11. In the result, appeal ITA.No.359/Hyd./2022 for the assessment year 2016-2017 is dismissed

SRK CONSTRUCTIONS AND PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

delay, does not come under\n\"sufficient and reasonable cause” for condonation of huge\ndelay a 445 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal.\nTherefore, we are of the considered view that, the appeal\nfiled by the appellant is not maintainable and, therefore, the\nappeal filed by the appellant/assessee is dismissed as un-\nadmitted.\n\n11.\nIn the result

VISWABHARATI MUTUALLY AIDED CO- OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-4(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

condoning the delay in filing the appeal. 3. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi ought to have decided the appeal on merits without prejudice to the delay of 3047 days in filing the appeal. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) not having adjudicated on merits of the matter the Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly set-aside the appeal to the file

VISWABHARATI MUTUALLY AIDED CO- OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-4(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

condoning the delay in filing the appeal. 3. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi ought to have decided the appeal on merits without prejudice to the delay of 3047 days in filing the appeal. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) not having adjudicated on merits of the matter the Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly set-aside the appeal to the file

ITO WARD-4(3), HYDERABAD vs. VISWABHARATI MUTUALLY AIDED CO- OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

condoning the delay in filing the appeal. 3. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi ought to have decided the appeal on merits without prejudice to the delay of 3047 days in filing the appeal. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) not having adjudicated on merits of the matter the Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly set-aside the appeal to the file

VISWABHARATI MUTUALLY AIDED CO- OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-4(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

condoning the delay in filing the appeal. 3. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi ought to have decided the appeal on merits without prejudice to the delay of 3047 days in filing the appeal. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) not having adjudicated on merits of the matter the Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly set-aside the appeal to the file

VISWABHARATI MUTUALLY AIDED CO- OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-4(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

condoning the delay in filing the appeal. 3. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi ought to have decided the appeal on merits without prejudice to the delay of 3047 days in filing the appeal. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) not having adjudicated on merits of the matter the Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly set-aside the appeal to the file

LAXMI VENKATESHWARA AUTO FINANCE,NALGONDA vs. ITO., WARD-1, NALGONDA

Bench: Us:

85,572/- as the assessee’s unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. Accordingly, the A.O., based on his aforesaid deliberations, made an addition u/s 69A of Rs. 1,27,22,000/- 4 Laxmi Venkateswara Auto Finance. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee firm carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A). As the assessee firm had delayed the filing

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

condone the delay in the filing of the appeal and admit the appeal filed by the assessee for adjudication. 7. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company has filed its return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 on 01.01.2014, declaring a total income of Rs.39,84,93,420/-. A search and seizure operation

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

3K TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD 2-(2), HYDERABAD

85,066/- debited under the head\n\"software expenses” in its Profit and Loss account, rejected its book\nresults and estimated the income @ 22% of its gross receipts of\nRs.18,26,67,662/-, and vide his order passed under section 143(3) of the\nAct, dated 30/03/2014 determined the same at Rs.4,01,86,886/-.\n5.\nAggrieved, the assessee company

KALINGA INSTITUTE OF MINING ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY TRUST,ANGUL vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

condone the delay of 85 days in filing of this\nappeal and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.\n4. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a trust\nregistered u/s.12AB of the Act. The Ld. CIT(E), vide order dated\n25.07.2024 passed u/s.12AB(4) of the Act, cancelled the registration\nof the assessee, primarily

GAYATRI PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee allowed for statistical purposes

condone the delay of 576 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 5. Brief facts of the case for that, the assessee company viz., “Gayatri Projects Limited, Hyderabad” engaged in the business of construction and building of infrastructure projects/facilities, filed it's return of income for the assessment year

SEVEN ENERGIES ODISHA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE 3(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1518/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Seven Energies Odisha Vs. Acit, Limited, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aatcs5759E (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sashank Dundu, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Ms. Aditi Goyal, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 20/02/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Company Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 07/02/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 18/12/2018 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. The Assessee

condone the delay involved in the filing of the present appeal. 11. Coming to the merits of the case, the Ld. AR has assailed the validity of the order passed by the AO under section 143(3) of the Act, dated 18/12/2018 for two fold reasons, viz., (i) that the AO had exceeded 9 Seven Energies Odisha Limited vs. ACIT

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2), HYDERABAD vs. AMR INDIA LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, Cross Objection No

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved. 13 ITA.Nos.534 & 535/Hyd./2024 & C.O.Nos.4 & 5/Hyd./2025 The question involved in the present set of appeals and review petition is answered accordingly in terms of the above and the appeals and review petition preferred by the Revenue are hereby dismissed. No costs." 6.3.1. Applying the judgment

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2), HYDERABAD vs. AMR INDIA LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, Cross Objection No

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved. 13 ITA.Nos.534 & 535/Hyd./2024 & C.O.Nos.4 & 5/Hyd./2025 The question involved in the present set of appeals and review petition is answered accordingly in terms of the above and the appeals and review petition preferred by the Revenue are hereby dismissed. No costs." 6.3.1. Applying the judgment