The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. K.V. Srinivasa Rao

Accordingly, the instant appeal being devoid of any merit is hereby dismissed

2) JLJR 433. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the impugned award is bad in law, as such, the instant appeal may be allowed by setting aside the impugned judgment. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that I.A. No.7561 of 2017 has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with

Maheswara Educational Society, vs. Director of Income Tax (Exemptions)

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

90 OF 2008 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961 against the Order dated 31-10-2007 passed in ITA No.270iHydl2005 for the Assessment Year 2004-2OO5 on the file of the lnmme Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad. Between: Maheswara Educational Warangal District. Society,, Maheswaram, Narasampet Mandal, ...Appellant AND Director

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Smt. Raj Kumari

Accordingly are partly allowed

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

90 of 2013 “Ramesh S/o Vithal Mane and others Vs. Gurling S/o Mahadeo Bhavare and others”, wherein it has been observed thus, “16. The above said circumstances show that, before the learned Single Judge of this Court, the decision of MRT was challenged and the decision was given within scope of provisions of Section 91 of the Hyderabad Tenancy