VILAS POLYMER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the six appeals i

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1870 To 1875/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2014-2015 To 2019-2020 Vilas Polymer Private The Dcit, Limited, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(2), Vs. Pin – 500 090 Hyderabad – 500 004. Pan Aaacv9854A Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca M V Prasad राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18.02.2026 आदेश/Order

u/s 148, approve the same. In fact, the approving authority in discharge of his aforesaid statutory duty is obligated to record his satisfaction as regards the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening the case of the assessee, in a manner, which would reveal that as per him it is a fit case for issuance of notice u/s

VILAS POLYMER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the six appeals i

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1870 To 1875/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2014-2015 To 2019-2020 Vilas Polymer Private The Dcit, Limited, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(2), Vs. Pin – 500 090 Hyderabad – 500 004. Pan Aaacv9854A Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca M V Prasad राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18.02.2026 आदेश/Order

u/s 148, approve the same. In fact, the approving authority in discharge of his aforesaid statutory duty is obligated to record his satisfaction as regards the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening the case of the assessee, in a manner, which would reveal that as per him it is a fit case for issuance of notice u/s

VILAS POLYMER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the six appeals i

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1870 To 1875/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2014-2015 To 2019-2020 Vilas Polymer Private The Dcit, Limited, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(2), Vs. Pin – 500 090 Hyderabad – 500 004. Pan Aaacv9854A Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca M V Prasad राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18.02.2026 आदेश/Order

u/s 148, approve the same. In fact, the approving authority in discharge of his aforesaid statutory duty is obligated to record his satisfaction as regards the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening the case of the assessee, in a manner, which would reveal that as per him it is a fit case for issuance of notice u/s

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), 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.1894/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Exel Rubber (P) Ltd Vs. Dy.Cit Hyderabad Central Circle 1(2) Pan:Aaace4495J Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 20/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11 Hyderabad, Dated 11/10/2025 For The A.Y 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

u/s 148, approve the same. In fact, the approving authority in discharge of his aforesaid statutory duty is obligated to record his satisfaction as regards the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening the case of the assessee, in a manner, which would reveal that as per him it is a fit case for issuance of notice u/s

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT.,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for the\nA

72,44,891\n2019-20\n5,36,35,960\n2,95,00,885\n2020-21\n6,42,24,650\n3,55,81,184\n2021-22\n5,50,26,236\n3,24,31,368\n2022-23\n4,74,93,505\n2,73,44,540\n2023-24\n3,46,39,767\n4,25,14,726\nTotal\nRs.65

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for the\nA

72,44,891\n2019-20\n5,36,35,960\n2,95,00,885\n2020-21\n6,42,24,650\n3,55,81,184\n2021-22\n5,50,26,236\n3,24,31,368\n2022-23\n4,74,93,505\n2,73,44,540\n2023-24\n3,46,39,767\n4,25,14,726\nTotal\nRs.65

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,K.V.RANGAREDDY vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for the\nA

72,44,891\n2019-20\n5,36,35,960\n2,95,00,885\n2020-21\n6,42,24,650\n3,55,81,184\n2021-22\n5,50,26,236\n3,24,31,368\n2022-23\n4,74,93,505\n2,73,44,540\n2023-24\n3,46,39,767\n4,25,14,726\n\nTotal\nRs.65

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for the\nA

72,44,891\n2019-20\n5,36,35,960\n2,95,00,885\n2020-21\n6,42,24,650\n3,55,81,184\n2021-22\n5,50,26,236\n3,24,31,368\n2022-23\n4,74,93,505\n2,73,44,540\n2023-24\n3,46,39,767\n4,25,14,726\nTotal\nRs.65

COUNTRY CLUB HOSPITALITY & HOLIDAYS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the IT Act for the A.Y 2010-11. Respectfully following the above decisions (cited supra), we hold that the assessee, which is following a uniform and consistence method of accounting, and has claimed the expenditure in accordance with the notification of the Min of Corporate Affairs and the A.O has allowed the same

BRIJESH CHANDWANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE -6(1), HYDERABAD

72. In view of the above, we find merit in Mr. Sehgal's contention that the impugned notice dated 30.07.2022 has been issued beyond the period of limitation. 73. The petition is accordingly allowed and the impugned order dated 30.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act; the impugned notice dated 30.07.2022 issued under Section

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

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

72,765/- Tax on total Income = 64,14,943/- Add: Interest u/s 234A 73,21,403/- Interest u/s 234B 29,229/- Interest u/s 234C Interest u/s 234D 0 Interest u/s 234F 0 1,37,65,576/- Total Interest 2,07,38,340/- Total tax +Interest = Less: TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 6,56,720/- Tax paid u/s 140A Regular

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

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

72,765/- Tax on total Income = 64,14,943/- Add: Interest u/s 234A 73,21,403/- Interest u/s 234B 29,229/- Interest u/s 234C Interest u/s 234D 0 Interest u/s 234F 0 1,37,65,576/- Total Interest 2,07,38,340/- Total tax +Interest = Less: TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 6,56,720/- Tax paid u/s 140A Regular

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

72,765/- Tax on total Income = 64,14,943/- Add: Interest u/s 234A 73,21,403/- Interest u/s 234B 29,229/- Interest u/s 234C Interest u/s 234D 0 Interest u/s 234F 0 1,37,65,576/- Total Interest 2,07,38,340/- Total tax +Interest = Less: TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 6,56,720/- Tax paid u/s 140A Regular

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

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

72,765/- Tax on total Income = 64,14,943/- Add: Interest u/s 234A 73,21,403/- Interest u/s 234B 29,229/- Interest u/s 234C Interest u/s 234D 0 Interest u/s 234F 0 1,37,65,576/- Total Interest 2,07,38,340/- Total tax +Interest = Less: TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 6,56,720/- Tax paid u/s 140A Regular

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ORBIT VENTURES, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

72,765/- Tax on total Income = 64,14,943/- Add: Interest u/s 234A 73,21,403/- Interest u/s 234B 29,229/- Interest u/s 234C Interest u/s 234D 0 Interest u/s 234F 0 1,37,65,576/- Total Interest 2,07,38,340/- Total tax +Interest = Less: TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 6,56,720/- Tax paid u/s 140A Regular

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

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

72,765/- Tax on total Income = 64,14,943/- Add: Interest u/s 234A 73,21,403/- Interest u/s 234B 29,229/- Interest u/s 234C Interest u/s 234D 0 Interest u/s 234F 0 1,37,65,576/- Total Interest 2,07,38,340/- Total tax +Interest = Less: TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 6,56,720/- Tax paid u/s 140A Regular

NAVAYUGA ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

72[Provided that where an assessee is required to furnish a report of audit specified under sub-clause (iv), (v), (vi) or (via) of clause (23C) of section 10, section 10A 73[, section 10AA], clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, section 44AB 73[, section 44DA, section 50B], section 80-IA, section 80-IB, section 80-IC, section

NAVAYUGA ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

72[Provided that where an assessee is required to furnish a report of audit specified under sub-clause (iv), (v), (vi) or (via) of clause (23C) of section 10, section 10A 73[, section 10AA], clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, section 44AB 73[, section 44DA, section 50B], section 80-IA, section 80-IB, section 80-IC, section

NAVAYUGA ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

72[Provided that where an assessee is required to furnish a report of audit specified under sub-clause (iv), (v), (vi) or (via) of clause (23C) of section 10, section 10A 73[, section 10AA], clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, section 44AB 73[, section 44DA, section 50B], section 80-IA, section 80-IB, section 80-IC, section