SRIPADA SRIVALLABHA MAHA SAMSTANAM,PITHAPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION WARD), RAJAHMUNDRY

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Balakrishnan, S & आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.289/Viz/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sripada Srivallabha Vs. Income Tax Officer Mahasamsthanam Exemption Ward Pithapuram Rajahmundry Pan:Aadts8424P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Vvs Narayana Medisetti राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/11/2024 आदेश/Order

delay of 31 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds: “1. Impugned order dated 24-12-2019 under section 143(3) of 1.T. Act determining total income at Rs 1,46,25,654/- and raising a demand

AGRI GOLD FOODS AND FARM PRODUCTS LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Us:

condone the delay involved in the filing of the present appeal. 6. Succinctly stated, the assessee company, which is engaged in the business of manufacturing cattle feed and seeds, had filed its return of income for A.Y. 2007-08 on 26.04.2008, declaring a loss of (-) Rs. 1,59,44,684/-. The return of income was initially processed as such

JAMI PRADHAMIKA VYAVASAYASHARAKARA PARAPATHI SANGHAM LTD.,,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 206/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17) Jami Pradhamika Vyavasaya Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sahakara Parapathi Vizianagaram. Sanghamltd., Vizianagaram. Pan: Aabaj1927F (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""थ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri I. Kama Sastry, Ar ""ाथ" की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

section 249(3) of the Act. Thus, the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC dismissed the assessee’s appeal without going into the merits of the case. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in refusing

VENKATA NARASIMHAM THOTA,KIRLAMPUDI MANDAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, KAKINADA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.207/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Venkata Narasimham Thota, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Veeravaram, Kirlampudi. Ward-2, Pan: Achpt2895H Kakinada. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Boda Anand Kumar, Ca (Hybrid) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 27/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm:

234B and 234C totalling to Rs.6,59,933/- is not correct in the facts and circumstances of appellant's case. 5. For the above grounds and any other ground or grounds, that may be urged during the course of hearing of the appeal, the appellant humbly prays to allow the appeal with consequent re- lief in favour of appellant

ADABALA MANMOHAN,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.135/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-12) Mr. Adabala Manmohan, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-International Taxation, Pan: Vpnao 1959 G Visakhapatnam. (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar

condone the delay of 296 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the case on merits. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee purchased an immovable property in plot no.9, Block No.45, TS No.1031/2, admeasuring 216.88 sq yds, Waltair Ward, Visakhapatnam from Smt. Davuluri Swapna, non-resident and Sri Kodali Rajendra