DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

disallowing the claim of 80IA as the assessee was not the owner of the infrastructural facilities laid / installed / created by it. In fact, the owner of the said infrastructural facilities were the Superintendent Engineer / Chief Engineer / Project Director of the concerned Government Department. He drew our attention to pages 3 to 5 of the assessment order and had also drawn

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

disallowing the claim of 80IA as the assessee was not the owner of the infrastructural facilities laid / installed / created by it. In fact, the owner of the said infrastructural facilities were the Superintendent Engineer / Chief Engineer / Project Director of the concerned Government Department. He drew our attention to pages 3 to 5 of the assessment order and had also drawn

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

disallowing the claim of 80IA as the assessee was not the owner of the infrastructural facilities laid / installed / created by it. In fact, the owner of the said infrastructural facilities were the Superintendent Engineer / Chief Engineer / Project Director of the concerned Government Department. He drew our attention to pages 3 to 5 of the assessment order and had also drawn

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. HES INFRA PVT LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

disallowing the claim of 80IA as the assessee was not the owner of the infrastructural facilities laid / installed / created by it. In fact, the owner of the said infrastructural facilities were the Superintendent Engineer / Chief Engineer / Project Director of the concerned Government Department. He drew our attention to pages 3 to 5 of the assessment order and had also drawn

HYDERABAD SCIENCE SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1128/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2015-2016 Hyderabad Science Society, Hyderabad. The Dcit, Vs. Pin - 500 028. Exemption Circle-1(1), Telangana. Hyderabad. Pan Aaath3789F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca For Revenue : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2026 आदेश/Order

B’ Bench, Hyderabad BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.1128/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2015-2016 Hyderabad Science Society, Hyderabad. The DCIT, vs. PIN - 500 028. Exemption Circle-1(1), Telangana. Hyderabad. PAN AAATH3789F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, CA For Revenue : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik

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).

12A(1)(b) of the Act. Consequently, the CPC treated the gross receipts of Rs.10,72,66,472/- as taxable income and raised a demand of Rs.7,46,74,360/-. 3. Aggrieved with such intimation issued under Section 143(1) of the Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 4. Before

ACIT., EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. PHARMACEUTICALS EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL OF INDIA, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. Pharmaceuticals Export Of Income Tax, Promotion Council Of India, Exemptions, Circle – 1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aadcp4643C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rv. Chalam, C.A. Revenue By: Shri B. Balakrishna, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.02.2025

12A of the Act on 09.09.2006. Therefore, the addition/disallowance made on account of expenditure incurred outside the country of Rs. 18,22,35,780 by not considering it as utilization for the purpose of Section 11 of the Act, is deleted. Accordingly, ground no.2 of appeal is allowed.” 4. Feeling aggrieved with the order of ld.CIT(A), Revenue

TELANGANA STATE MEDICAL COUNCIL,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTIONS) WARD-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

B’ Bench, Hyderabad श्री रविश सूद, न् याययक सदस् य एिं श्री मिुसूदन सािडिया, लेखा सदस् य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.399/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2018-19) M/s. Telangana State Medical Income Tax Officer, Vs. Council, Hyderabad. (Exemptions), Ward-1(1), PAN:AAEAT7458E Hyderabad. (Appellant

POWER MECH PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

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

B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No. 155/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Power Mech Projects Deputy Commissioner of Ltd., Vs. Income Tax, Hyderabad Central Circle-1(3), [PAN No. AACCP0818L] Hyderabad अपीलार्थीर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारितीती द्वारा /Assessee by: Shri P. Vinod, AR राजस्‍वजस्‍व द्वारा

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. SRI CHAITANYA EDUCATIONAL COMMITTE, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The exemption provided under sections 11 and 12 are subject to certain conditions provided under section 13 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Section 13 deals with any part of income or any property of the Trust or Institution directly and directly used for the benefit of any person referred to in section

SRI MODH VISA GOWBHUJA SAJNA,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us (As Uploaded):

1) are as under: As per the details furnished in the return, Assessee is not registered u/s 12A/12AA or approved u/s 10(23C)(iv) or 10(23C)(v) or 10(23C)(vi) or 10(23C)(via). Claim of exemption has been made in Sl. No. 4i to 4viii of Schedule Part B-TI. These fields are applicable for claim

ANJUMAN E KHADIMUL MUSLIMEEN REFAH-E AAM,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT-EXEMPTION, CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

B’ Bench, Hyderabad BEFORE SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.616/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2014-15) Anjuman E Khadimul Muslimeen Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. Circle 1(1), Hyderabad. Refah-E Aam, Hyderabad. PAN:AAAAA0274F (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध

ABID ALI KHAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.457/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Abid Ali Khan Educational Dcit Trust Vs. Exemption Hyderabad Circle-1(1) [Pan : Aaata4256G] Hyderabad अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee By: Mohd Shoeb, Ar राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 20/08/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement On: 25/09/2024

12A(1)(b) of the Act read with proviso of Rule 12(2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and accordingly dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 3. Hence the assessee filed this appeal contending that the requirement of filing Form 10/10B is merely directory in nature and failure to furnish the same before the due date prescribed in section

SEVA BHARATHI,HYDERABAD vs. CIT., EXEMPTION WARD 1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.No.1307/Hyd

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.365 & 1307/Hyd/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year 2022-2023 Seva Bharathi, The Commissioner Of Hyderabad – 500 018. Income Tax Vs. Telangana. (Exemptions), Ward-1(4), Pan Aayts5233K Hyderabad – 500 004. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Sri Harsha राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 08.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 15.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

disallowed on a technical reason of delay in filing of the Audit Report in Form No. 10BB, which is due to reasonable cause and the same is beyond the control of the appellant. 9. The assessee may add, alter or modify or substitute any other points to the grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time

SEVA BHARATHI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., EXEMPTION WARD 1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.No.1307/Hyd

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.365 & 1307/Hyd/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year 2022-2023 Seva Bharathi, The Commissioner Of Hyderabad – 500 018. Income Tax Vs. Telangana. (Exemptions), Ward-1(4), Pan Aayts5233K Hyderabad – 500 004. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Sri Harsha राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 08.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 15.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

disallowed on a technical reason of delay in filing of the Audit Report in Form No. 10BB, which is due to reasonable cause and the same is beyond the control of the appellant. 9. The assessee may add, alter or modify or substitute any other points to the grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time

SANGHI INDUSTRIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -3 (1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

Disallowance of CSR expenses of Rs. 1,42,97,133/- against the returned income of Rs. 50,81,16,931/-. 2.1 Feeling aggrieved, the assessee raised certain objections before the Ld. DRP. The Ld. DRP, after considering the submissions of the assessee and also going through the material available on record, dismissed the objections raised by the assessee. Thereafter

SEW FOUNDATION,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.499/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sew Foundation Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad (Exemptions), Ward 1(4) Pan:Aaats7433H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate V Siva Kumar राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Vinodh Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27/01/2025 Of The Learned Cit (A)/Addl/Jcit(A)-1 Coimbatore, For The A.Y.2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Learned Cit (A)/Addl/Jcit(A)-5 Coimbatore, 27-01-2025 Is Erroneous, Contrary To Law & Facts Of The Case.

12A and approval u/s 80G were available in return of income. The learned CIT (A) further ought to have seen that Appellant’s accounts were audited by C.A whose details are furnished in the return of income. Hence, , denying exemption u/s 11 to the Appellant and restricting corpus donations of Rs.28,73,338/- by the Assessing Officer is not justified

SAGARA KSHATRIYA WELFARE AND CHARITABLE TRUST ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1(4), HYD, HYDERABAD

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

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

B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No. 465/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2022-23) Sagara Kshatriya Welfare Income Tax Officer and Charitable Trust, Vs. Exemption, Hyderabad Ward-1(4), [PAN No. AAITS5674C] Hyderabad अपीलार्थीर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारितीती द्वारा /Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas, AR राजस्‍वजस्‍व द्वारा /Revenue

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

b) of the Act, ii) the assessee will have to maintain separate set of books in accordance with section 11(4A) of the Act, iii) the assessee has to keep its funds under the mode specified u/s.11(5) of the Act and iv) there should not be any violation of section 13 of the Act C.O. Nos.19 to 24/Hyd/2022