VIJAYAWADA TOLLWAY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is\nOrder pronounced in the Open Court on 6th February, 2026

disallowance of expenditure, the Ld. AO initiated\npenalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and levied\npenalty of Rs.3,74,31,109/- vide order dated 27.03.2022.\n4.\nAggrieved with the penalty order of the Ld. AO, the\nassessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who confirmed\nthe penalty levied by the Ld. AO and dismissed

SREE NAGENDRA CONSTRUCTIONS,,KHAMMAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the\nappellate order passed by the CIT(A) is erroneous both on\nfacts and in law to the extent the order is prejudicial to the\ninterest of the appellant.\n\n2. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the\nLd. AO erred in making addition

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

disallowed on a technical reason of delay in\nfiling of the Audit Report in Form No. 10B, which is due to\na reasonable cause and the same is beyond the control of\nthe appellant.\n4.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) has erred in observing that the appellant\nhas not given any reasonable cause for delay in filing the\nappeal by over

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

disallowed on a technical reason of delay in\nfiling of the Audit Report in Form No. 10B, which is due to\na reasonable cause and the same is beyond the control of\nthe appellant.\n4.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) has erred in observing that the appellant\nhas not given any reasonable cause for delay in filing the\nappeal by over

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

disallowed on a technical reason of delay in\nfiling of the Audit Report in Form No. 10B, which is due to\na reasonable cause and the same is beyond the control of\nthe appellant.\n4.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) has erred in observing that the appellant\nhas not given any reasonable cause for delay in filing the\nappeal by over

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, WARANGAL vs. SHIVA KUMAR THOTA, WARANGAL

In the result, the primary objection filed by the assessee vide his letter, dated 02/06/2025 is allowed while for the appeal filed by

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.996/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shiva Kumar Thota, Ward-1, Warangal. Warangal. Pan: Aaopt4519M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 06/08/2024 Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 26/05/2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Revenue Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

disallowance towards TDS and VAT payable under section 43B of the Act: Rs. 6,08,694/-; and (v) addition of Rs.3,34,246/- on account of estimated profit on undisclosed sales: Rs.3,34,246/-, but at the same time declined the assessee’s claim regarding the validity of jurisdiction that was assumed by the AO, while initiating proceedings under section

ASST. DIRECTOR OF IT (EXEMP)-II,, HYDERABAD vs. ACTION FOR WELFARE AND AWAKENING IN RURAL ENVIRONMENT (AWARE), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.709/Hyd/2012 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:1995-96) Asst. Director Of Income Tax Vs. Action For Welfare & (Exemptions)-Ii, Awakening In Rural Hyderabad. Environment (Aware), Shantivanam, Nagarjuna Sagar Road, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaata2338R (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.138/Hyd/2012 (In आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.709/Hyd/2012) ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:1995-96) Asst. Director Of Income Tax Vs. Action For Welfare & (Exemptions)-Ii, Awakening In Rural Hyderabad. Environment (Aware), Pragati Bhavan, D.No.5-9- 24/78, Lake Hill Road, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad- 500463. Pan: Aaata2338R (Respondent/Cross Objector) (Appellant In Appeal) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "वारा/Revenue By:: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 08/01/2026 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pronouncement: 13/02/2026

disallowing the exemption claimed by the assessee u/s.11. 7. The decision the CIT(A) is erroneous both in facts and in law that the A.O. denied exemption against the income earned for the A.Ys. 1991-92, 1992-93 and 1994-95 and accordingly, the same can not be considered as accumulation u/s.11(2) of the 1.T.Act. The Id.CIT(A) failed

SKANDA BUILDERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

disallowance u/sec.40(a)(ia) of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”], but, failed to give any\nspecific example of any expenditure which can be subjected to\nprovisions of sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act and also the decision of\njurisdictional High Court in the case of Indwell Construction\nvs., CIT [1998] 232 ITR 776 (A.P)held that

VEERA REDDY POSHAM,NALGONDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.No.1830/Hyd

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.Nos.1829 & 1830/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2020-2021 & 2022-2023 Veera Reddy Posham, The Acit, Nalgonda – 508 246 Central Circle-1(1), Vs. Telangana. Hyderabad. Telangana. Pan Aijpp0376P (Applicant) (Respondent) -None- िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By : राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13.03.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

246 Central Circle-1(1), vs. Telangana. Hyderabad. Telangana. PAN AIJPP0376P (Applicant) (Respondent) -None- िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee by : राज" व "ारा/Revenue by : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 09.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13.03.2026 आदेश/ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT : These two appeals by the Assessee are directed against the separate

PRYSMIAN CAVI E SISTEMI S.R.L,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT (INT,TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

246/-. While\ncomputing the total income, the Ld. AO adopted the income assessed in the\nearlier order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act dated 20.12.2006 and\nadded the above estimated profits over and above the same. The assessee\nfiled a third appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against this reassessment order under\nsection 143(3) r.w.s

VEERA REDDY POSHAM,NALGONDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.No.1830/Hyd

246\nTelangana.\nPAN AIJPP0376P\n(Applicant)\nThe ACIT,\nCentral Circle-1(1),\nHyderabad.\nTelangana.\n(Respondent)\nvs.\nनिर्धारिती द्वारा/Assessee by : -None-\nराजस्व द्वारा /Revenue by : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR\nसुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 09.03.2026\nघोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 13.03.2026\nआदेश/ORDER\nPER VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT :\nThese two appeals by the Assessee are directed\nagainst

MRL TRADING COMPANY,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-7(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

section.\n4. The Appellate Commissioner ignored the fact that the deposits\nin the bank are proceeds of regular sales of the assessee.\n5. The Appellate Commissioner, erred in coming to a conclusion\nsimilar to that of the A.O, that having accepted that the\ndeposits are sale of ITC products should not have added the\nsame as unexplained credits u/s.69A

PRYSMIAN CAVI E SISTEMI SRL INDIA PROJECT OFFICE (FORMERLY PIRELLI CAVI SISTEMI S P A INDIA PROJECT OFFICE),HYDERABAD vs. DCIT,( INT TAXN)-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

246/-. While\ncomputing the total income, the Ld. AO adopted the income assessed in the\nearlier order under section 143(3) r.w.s.263 of the Act dated 20.12.2006 and\nadded the above estimated profits over and above the same. The assessee\nfiled a third appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against this reassessment order under\nsection 143(3) r.w.s.147

ASWIN ENTERPRISES,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), HYDERABAD

1. The order of the learned Assessing Officer is bad in law & on facts and is against all canons of equity and natural justice. 2. The learned Assessing Officer, in disallowing the entire direct expenditure viz., commission of Rs.97,71,329, Salaries of Rs.24,46,699, travelling expenses of Rs.3,51,246 other expenses of Rs.7,48,497 and also

SHUBHAM TRADING COMPANY,NIZAMABAD vs. ITO., WARD 1, NIZAMABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

disallowance of ITA No.840/Hyd/2025 7 Rs.8,27,230/- under section 43B of the Act on account of alleged non- payment of VAT and CST liabilities. The assessee relied upon the assessment order passed by the Commercial Tax Department placed at page 1 to 8 of the paper book, which shows that the VAT liability of the assessee for financial year

TARUN KUMAR GOYAL (HUF) ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

section 143(3) of the Act was completed by order dated 03/11/2016 by making an addition of Rs. 36,83,077/- which represented the sale consideration of shares, under the head "Income from Other Sources." Page 2 of 8 ITA No.2093/Hyd/2017 & 455/Hyd/2020 Tarun Kumar Goyal (HUF) 4. Aggrieved by such an ac"on of the learned Assessing Officer, assessee preferred

TARUN KUMAR GOYAL (HUF),HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

section 143(3) of the Act was completed by order dated 03/11/2016 by making an addition of Rs. 36,83,077/- which represented the sale consideration of shares, under the head "Income from Other Sources." Page 2 of 8 ITA No.2093/Hyd/2017 & 455/Hyd/2020 Tarun Kumar Goyal (HUF) 4. Aggrieved by such an ac"on of the learned Assessing Officer, assessee preferred

FARMAX INDIA LIMITED,,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed and the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2009-10 Farmax India Limited Vs. Dcit,Circle-1(3) 4Th Floor, Alluri Trade Centre I.T.Towers, A.C.Guards Bhagayanagar Colony Masab Tank Opp.Kphb Colony Hyderabad Kukatpally Hyderabad-500 072

section 35D(2) of the I.T.Act. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld.CIT(A) on this issue and accordingly, the same is upheld. The grounds raised by the assessee is accordingly dismissed. 14. Grounds of appeal No. 4 and 5 relate to the order of the ld.CIT(A) in sustaining the addition of Rs.3