M/S ABC ENGINEERING WORKS,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE DCIT,, VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Vs. M/S Abc Engineering Works Vijayawada Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.79/Viz/2013 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 210/Viz/2015 & 75/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2012-13) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar , Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] Dy.Cit, Circle-1(1) Vijayawada (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)

delay of 1416 days without filing condonation petition. Since the assessee failed to furnish the condonation petition, the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine. I.T.A. No.210/Viz/2015, A.Y.2010-11 24. As stated in the earlier paragraphs, the AO passed assessment order u/s 143(3) on total income of Rs.1,87,88,140/- and the assessee went on appeal

THE ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA vs. M/S. ABC ENGINEERING WORKS,, VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Vs. M/S Abc Engineering Works Vijayawada Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.79/Viz/2013 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 210/Viz/2015 & 75/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2012-13) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar , Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] Dy.Cit, Circle-1(1) Vijayawada (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)

delay of 1416 days without filing condonation petition. Since the assessee failed to furnish the condonation petition, the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine. I.T.A. No.210/Viz/2015, A.Y.2010-11 24. As stated in the earlier paragraphs, the AO passed assessment order u/s 143(3) on total income of Rs.1,87,88,140/- and the assessee went on appeal

THE ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA vs. M/S. ABC ENGINEERING WORKS,, VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Vs. M/S Abc Engineering Works Vijayawada Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.79/Viz/2013 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 210/Viz/2015 & 75/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2012-13) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar , Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] Dy.Cit, Circle-1(1) Vijayawada (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)

delay of 1416 days without filing condonation petition. Since the assessee failed to furnish the condonation petition, the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine. I.T.A. No.210/Viz/2015, A.Y.2010-11 24. As stated in the earlier paragraphs, the AO passed assessment order u/s 143(3) on total income of Rs.1,87,88,140/- and the assessee went on appeal

AUDREY BERNICE ROY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

rectification & making it zero being Professional income and taxing again an amount to Rs. 14,16,609/- as other sources (though form 26AS shows the same u/s 194J) and the reply of the assessee was not taken into consideration as sec 44ADA though shown in sec 143(1)(a) in the proposed adjustment. Therefore, the same is beyond the scope

PARASURAM KESARI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(4), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

rectification petition filed by the assessee, granted relief to the extent of claim made by the assessee. However, in the order passed U/s. 154, the Ld. AO enhanced the disallowances U/s. 40A(3) of the Act to the extent of Rs. 47,78,100/- against the original amount of Rs. 26,36,900/- and raised a tax demand

ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LIMITED,KANURU vs. ITO, TDS, WARD(1), ELURU, ELURU

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.29/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2019-20) Vs. Andhra Pradesh State Civil The Income Tax Officer (Tds)-Ward-1 Eluru – 534001 Supplies Corporation Limited Andhra Pradesh 10-152/1, 4Th Floor Sai Towers, Ashok Nagar Bandar Road, Kanuru – 520007 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aabca7161R]

rectification order U/s. 154 of the Act dated 02/12/2019 by enhancing tax by Rs. 84,33,151/-. The Ld. AO issued a show cause notice requiring the assessee to file its objections on or before 27/11/2019. However, the assessee sought 30 days’ time vide letter dated 25/11/2019. The Ld. AO did not consider the submission of the assessee and proceeded

BALAJEE CONSTRUCTIONS,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS WARD-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

condone the delay of 16 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 4. Since the grounds raised by the assessee in all the three appeals are identical, we shall take up the ITA No. 236/Viz/2022 (AY 2013-14) as the lead appeal. 5. Brief facts of the case pertaining

BALAJEE CONSTRUCTIONS,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS WARD-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

condone the delay of 16 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 4. Since the grounds raised by the assessee in all the three appeals are identical, we shall take up the ITA No. 236/Viz/2022 (AY 2013-14) as the lead appeal. 5. Brief facts of the case pertaining

BALAJEE CONSTRUCTIONS,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS WARD-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

condone the delay of 16 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 4. Since the grounds raised by the assessee in all the three appeals are identical, we shall take up the ITA No. 236/Viz/2022 (AY 2013-14) as the lead appeal. 5. Brief facts of the case pertaining

SAMYUKTA HEALTH &ACADEMIC SOCIETY,ANAKAPALLE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.232/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Samyukta Health & Academic Society Vs. Income Tax Officer Ramalayam Street Exemption Ward Gandhi Nagar Visakhapatnam Anakapalle [Pan : Aagts9608E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable trust, filed its return of income for the A.Y.2017-18. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”). While processing the return, the assessee was denied depreciation and the 3 I.T.A

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE MAHARAJA CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.453/Viz/2019 & 454/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. The Maharaja Co-Operative Circle-1(1) Urban Bank Ltd Visakhapatnam D.No.49-9-14, Dwaraka Nagar Ganta Arcade Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaaat4196K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No. 146/Viz/2019 & 147/Viz/2019 Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.453/Viz/2019 & 454/Viz/2019) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively) The Maharaja Co-Operative Urban Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Bank Ltd Income Tax D.No.49-9-14, Dwaraka Nagar Circle-1(1) Ganta Arcade Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaaat4196K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2019

condoning the delay. Hence, the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed in limine. 2. These appeals are filed by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]-1, Visakhapatnam in I.T.A. No.10380/2016-17/AC,C-1(1),VSP/2018-19 and 10151/2017- 18/AC,C-1(1),VSP/2018-19 dated 29.01.2019 for the Assessment Year

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE MAHARAJA CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.453/Viz/2019 & 454/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. The Maharaja Co-Operative Circle-1(1) Urban Bank Ltd Visakhapatnam D.No.49-9-14, Dwaraka Nagar Ganta Arcade Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaaat4196K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No. 146/Viz/2019 & 147/Viz/2019 Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.453/Viz/2019 & 454/Viz/2019) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively) The Maharaja Co-Operative Urban Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Bank Ltd Income Tax D.No.49-9-14, Dwaraka Nagar Circle-1(1) Ganta Arcade Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaaat4196K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2019

condoning the delay. Hence, the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed in limine. 2. These appeals are filed by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]-1, Visakhapatnam in I.T.A. No.10380/2016-17/AC,C-1(1),VSP/2018-19 and 10151/2017- 18/AC,C-1(1),VSP/2018-19 dated 29.01.2019 for the Assessment Year

SAMYUKTA HEALTH & ACADEMIC SOCIETY,ANAKAPALLE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.45/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-21) Samyukta Health & Academic Vs. Income Tax Officer Society Exemption Ward Ramalayam Street, Gandhi Nagar Visakhapatnam Anakapalle [Pan : Aagts9608E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 24.04.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/10482/12219(1), Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “Act”) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2020-21. 2

rectification order was passed on 20.04.2022 u/s 154 of the Act, without allowing the exemption and the total income was determined as the same in the intimation at Rs.98,54,543/-. 3 I.T.A. No.45/Viz/2023, A.Y.2020-21 Samyukta Health & Academic Society, Anakapalle 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) partly allowed

RAMANUJA PEETHAM,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.198/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2016-17) Sri Ramanuja Peetham Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.1-104-15, Plot No.40, Sector-5 (Exemption Ward) Ttd Kalyanamandapam Road Visakhapatnam Mvp Colony, Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aafts4193P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Smt.A.Aruna, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Madhukar Aves, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18 .10.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) [Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1052984661(1) Dated 19.05.2023 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.)2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Trust, Registered U/S 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘Act’) Had Filed Return Of Income For The A.Y.2016-17 On 09.09.2016, Declaring Nil Income After

154 r.w.s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 21.09.2023 by allowing the exemption claimed u/s 11 of the Act. Therefore, the assessee filed a petition before the Tribunal, submitting that since the delay in filing Form No.10B was condoned and exemption u/s 11 was granted, the grievance of the assessee stood redressed and the appeal becomes infructuous

KONATHALA RAJENDRA PRASAD,ANAKAPALLE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ANAKAPALLE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in-limine

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.277/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Konathala Rajendra Prasad Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.14-17-9/1 Ward-1 Rythu Sangam Veedhi Anakapalle Gavarapalem Anakapalle [Pan : Ahupk0522A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

condonation of delay and 2 I.T.A. No.277/Viz/2023, A.Y.2008-09 Konatala Rajendra Prasad, Anakapalle submitted that the appeal against the order of the Ld.CIT(A) dated 26.06.2019 ought to have been filed on or before 26.08.2019, but the appeal could be filed only on 03.11.2023 with the delay of 1459 days due to the following reasons as submitted by the assessee

SATYA TULASI DONEPALLI,KORUKONDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 3, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NEAR KAMBALA TANK

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.13/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year:2011-12) Vs. Satya Tulasi Donepalli Income Tax Officer-Ward-3 Rajahmundry Sri Parvathi Parameswara Oil Agency Main Road, Korukonda East Godavari District – 533289 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Avtpd0908N] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate : Shri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 20.08.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2025

Rectification Petition u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and that option was discouraged by him after a lapse of nearly 10 months. And further, we were left with the option to file an appeal. But again the Assessing Officer advised us to file a Revision Petition u/s 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ii. At the initial

BHARATH YUVA SANKSHEMA SANGHAM,ELURU vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, ELURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआईटीए. नं. / Ita No. 160/Viz/2025 निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year:2018-19) Bharath Yuva Sankshema Sangham V. Income Tax Officer 20B-7-21/1 Income Tax Office C/O. Ayyappa Medicals Eluru, West Godavari Andhra Pradesh Gandhi Nagar, Eluru West Godavari District – 534002 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aidpg1046K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri C. Subrahmanyam राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

condone the delay of 19 Page No. 2 Bharath Yuva Sankshema Sangham days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Brief facts of the case are, assessee’s society is engaged in providing man power services to various government departments. During the year under consideration, the assessee

SRIKANTH ATLURI,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TXA OFFICER, WARD-2(3), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.491/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2021-22) Srikanth Atluri V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(3) Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh 30-13/1-18, Durgaagraharam Vijayawada – 520002 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Afrpa5568H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

condone the delay of 51 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Brief facts of the case are, assessee being a Non-Resident Individual filed his return of income on 30.09.2021 admitting a total income of Rs. 31,51,720/- for the A.Y. 2021-22. While