BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

182 results for “condonation of delay”+ Unexplained Cash Creditclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai488Kolkata462Mumbai420Delhi313Ahmedabad259Bangalore188Hyderabad182Pune152Surat133Jaipur128Indore67Rajkot61Cochin60Chandigarh57Calcutta49Visakhapatnam48Lucknow47Amritsar45Raipur41Panaji40Nagpur40Patna35Agra20Cuttack19Allahabad16Jabalpur10Guwahati9Jodhpur7Dehradun5Varanasi5Ranchi3SC1Telangana1Orissa1Karnataka1

Key Topics

Addition to Income93Section 153C85Section 6867Cash Deposit67Section 69A57Section 143(3)51Section 14738Section 142(1)36Section 148

DEMI REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes on the above terms

ITA 156/HYD/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

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

For Respondent: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakhsmi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 40a

condoning the delay. and the remaining ground nos.4 to 16 for discussion can be summarized as follows: 1) Ground 4: Disallowance of Rs.24,94,00,000 under section 40A(3) of the Act. 2) Grounds 5 to 7: Disallowance of Rs.21,08,45,001 under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 3) Grounds 8 and 9: Payments made

Showing 1–20 of 182 · Page 1 of 10

...
35
Section 14430
Penalty27
Limitation/Time-bar27

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

ITA 398/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

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

Section 144Section 234ASection 249(3)Section 68

cash credit in the books of the assessee is prima facie explained. The Ld. AR further submitted that when there was no change in facts and circumstances of the case, it was not necessary for the Ld. CIT (A) to demand for a second remand report. The Ld. AR vehemently argued by stating that the Ld. CIT (A) had failed

BRAMHANI INDUSTRIES LIMITED, JAMMALAMADUGU,KADAPA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

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

ITA 512/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

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

Section 144Section 234ASection 249(3)Section 68

cash credit in the books of the assessee is prima facie explained. The Ld. AR further submitted that when there was no change in facts and circumstances of the case, it was not necessary for the Ld. CIT (A) to demand for a second remand report. The Ld. AR vehemently argued by stating that the Ld. CIT (A) had failed

JOSHITA INFRA DEVELOPERS LLP,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1055/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 44A

condone the delay of 168 days in adjudication. 6. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a Limited Liability Partnership, engaged in the business of marketing open plots by purchase and selling through Agents, filed its return of income for the assessment year 2022-23 on 22.07.2022, declaring a business loss

ITO., WARD 14(1), HYDERABAD vs. JOSHITA INFRA DEVELOPERS LLP, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 672/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 44A

condone the delay of 168 days in adjudication. 6. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a Limited Liability Partnership, engaged in the business of marketing open plots by purchase and selling through Agents, filed its return of income for the assessment year 2022-23 on 22.07.2022, declaring a business loss

ANKAA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 105/HYD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2014-15
Section 132

condone\nthe delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice.\n\n17. The facts and issues involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue\nand the appeal filed by the assessee are identical to the facts and\nissues, which we had considered in assessee's own case in ITA\nNo.71/Hyd/2021 and ITA No.102/Hyd/2021 for the A.Y.2011-12

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ANKAA REALTORS , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 74/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 17. The facts and issues involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue and the appeal filed by the assessee are identical to the facts and issues, which we had considered in assessee’s own case in ITA No.71/Hyd/2021 and ITA No.102/Hyd/2021 for the A.Y.2011-12

ANKA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOM, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 102/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 17. The facts and issues involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue and the appeal filed by the assessee are identical to the facts and issues, which we had considered in assessee’s own case in ITA No.71/Hyd/2021 and ITA No.102/Hyd/2021 for the A.Y.2011-12

ANKA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 103/HYD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 17. The facts and issues involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue and the appeal filed by the assessee are identical to the facts and issues, which we had considered in assessee’s own case in ITA No.71/Hyd/2021 and ITA No.102/Hyd/2021 for the A.Y.2011-12

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ANKAA REALTORS , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 73/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 17. The facts and issues involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue and the appeal filed by the assessee are identical to the facts and issues, which we had considered in assessee’s own case in ITA No.71/Hyd/2021 and ITA No.102/Hyd/2021 for the A.Y.2011-12

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(4) , HYDERABAD vs. ANKAA REALTORS , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 72/HYD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 17. The facts and issues involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue and the appeal filed by the assessee are identical to the facts and issues, which we had considered in assessee’s own case in ITA No.71/Hyd/2021 and ITA No.102/Hyd/2021 for the A.Y.2011-12

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ANKAA REALTORS, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 71/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 17. The facts and issues involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue and the appeal filed by the assessee are identical to the facts and issues, which we had considered in assessee’s own case in ITA No.71/Hyd/2021 and ITA No.102/Hyd/2021 for the A.Y.2011-12

ANKAA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 108/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 17. The facts and issues involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue and the appeal filed by the assessee are identical to the facts and issues, which we had considered in assessee’s own case in ITA No.71/Hyd/2021 and ITA No.102/Hyd/2021 for the A.Y.2011-12

ANKAA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 107/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 17. The facts and issues involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue and the appeal filed by the assessee are identical to the facts and issues, which we had considered in assessee’s own case in ITA No.71/Hyd/2021 and ITA No.102/Hyd/2021 for the A.Y.2011-12

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4) ,HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. ANKAA REALTORS ,HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 75/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 17. The facts and issues involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue and the appeal filed by the assessee are identical to the facts and issues, which we had considered in assessee’s own case in ITA No.71/Hyd/2021 and ITA No.102/Hyd/2021 for the A.Y.2011-12

ANKA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 104/HYD/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 17. The facts and issues involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue and the appeal filed by the assessee are identical to the facts and issues, which we had considered in assessee’s own case in ITA No.71/Hyd/2021 and ITA No.102/Hyd/2021 for the A.Y.2011-12

ANKAA REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and assessee for the A

ITA 106/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.71/Hyd/2021 To 75/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y.: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 To 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ankaa Realtors Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.102/Hyd/2021 To 108/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ankaa Realtors Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Abffa0287M] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 25/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 To 2017-18. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 17. The facts and issues involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue and the appeal filed by the assessee are identical to the facts and issues, which we had considered in assessee’s own case in ITA No.71/Hyd/2021 and ITA No.102/Hyd/2021 for the A.Y.2011-12

PASUPULETI VENKATESHWARA RAO PASUPLETI BALAKRISHNA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO-WARD-12(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1282/HYD/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2025AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: Shri K. Chandrasekhar Reddy AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashutosh Pradhan, Sr. AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

delay of 72 days, citing ill health. The Assessing Officer added Rs.16 lakhs as unexplained cash credit under Section 69A of the Act based on demonetization period deposits, which was partially confirmed by the CIT(A) to the extent of Rs.8,95,000/-.", "held": "The Tribunal condoned

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ACE CONSTRUCTIONS, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 52/HYD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudhan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

condone the delay and admit the appeals at Sl.Nos.1 to 5 and 10 to 14 for hearing. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds in ITA 26/Hyd/2021 for A.Y. 2010-11 : “1. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in not adjudicating the grounds urged by the assessee on correctness of additions / disallowance on merits

ROYAL ENGINEERING,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 15/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudhan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

condone the delay and admit the appeals at Sl.Nos.1 to 5 and 10 to 14 for hearing. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds in ITA 26/Hyd/2021 for A.Y. 2010-11 : “1. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in not adjudicating the grounds urged by the assessee on correctness of additions / disallowance on merits