BALA TRIPURA SUNDARI BOPPANA,DUBACHERLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3),, VIJAYAWADA

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

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.427/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) Bala Tripura Sundari Boppana V. Ito – Ward – 2(3) Central Revenue Building G-2, Sunrise Apartments M.G. Road, Vijayawada Opp. Elite School, Chebrolu Road Andhra Pradesh - 520001 Dubacherla, Nallajerla Mandal Andhra Pradesh – 534112 [Pan: Aiepb0600R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

2 I.T.A.No.427/VIZ/2024 Bala Tripura Sundari Boppana 4. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record, we notice that the moot question to be adjudicated is with respect to condonation of delay. Broadly, we are of the view, that the Courts and the quasi-judicial bodies are empowered to condone the delay, if a litigant

SRI VINAYAKA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,VIZIANAGARAM 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’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआईटीए. नं. / Ita No. 120/Viz/2025 (A.Y. 2018-19) Sri Vinayaka Educational Trust V. Income Tax Officer (Exemption Ward) Income Tax Office Panukuvalaasa Village Infinity Towers Pachipenta Mandal Sankaramatam Road Vizianagaram – 535591 Visakhapatnam – 530016 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aaits1192H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

253 of the Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice. It must be remembered that in every case of delay, there can be some lapses on the part of the litigant concern. That alone is not enough to turn down the plea and to shut the doors against him, unless and until, it makes

KAKUMANU NAVEEN KUMAR,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.469 & 470/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Kakumanu Naveen Kumar V. Ito – Ward – 2(1) Central Revenue Building Flat No. 201, Venkata Raghava Residency Radio Colony, Beside Med Plus Medical Shop M.G. Road, Vijayawada Vijayawada – 520008 Andhra Pradesh - 520002 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Cmspk2757G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

2 I.T.A.No.469 & 470/VIZ/2024 Kakumanu Naveen Kumar pleaded that one more opportunity may be provided to the assessee in the interest of justice. 4. Per contra, Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] strongly placed reliance on the order of the Ld.CIT(A) in rejecting the condonation petition. Ld. DR strongly opposed for condonation of delay. 5. We have heard

KAKUMANU NAVEEN KUMAR,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.469 & 470/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Kakumanu Naveen Kumar V. Ito – Ward – 2(1) Central Revenue Building Flat No. 201, Venkata Raghava Residency Radio Colony, Beside Med Plus Medical Shop M.G. Road, Vijayawada Vijayawada – 520008 Andhra Pradesh - 520002 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Cmspk2757G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

2 I.T.A.No.469 & 470/VIZ/2024 Kakumanu Naveen Kumar pleaded that one more opportunity may be provided to the assessee in the interest of justice. 4. Per contra, Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] strongly placed reliance on the order of the Ld.CIT(A) in rejecting the condonation petition. Ld. DR strongly opposed for condonation of delay. 5. We have heard

SIMHADRI SUNITHA,VIZAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), VISAKHAPATNAM

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

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.114/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2011-12) Simhadri Sunitha V. Ito – Ward – 4(2) Income Tax Office D.No. 48-8-18, Chikkala Residency Direct Taxes Building Flat No. 1, 4Th Floor, Dwarakanagar Mvp Double Road Visakhapatnam – 530016 Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Avtps9852Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

2 I.T.A.No.114/VIZ/2025 Simhadri Sunitha 4. Per contra, Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] strongly placed reliance on the order of the Ld.CIT(A) in rejecting the condonation petition. Ld. DR strongly opposed for condonation of delay. 5. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record, we notice that the moot question

THE ETIKOPPAKA COOP AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

2 SCC 412 and General Finance Co. v. Asst. CIT: (2002) 257 ITR 338 (SC) . The said submissions found favour with the Division Bench of the Guahati High Court and relying on earlier decisions of its own Court in CIT v. Assam Tribune: (2002) 253 ITR 93 and CIT v. Bharat Bamboo and Tiber Suppliers

THE NARSAPUR BRAHMANA SAMAKHYA,NARSAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PALKOL

In the result, the appeal of the appellant society is dismissed in- limine

Bench: The Ld.Cit(A). The Reasons Given For Delayed Filing Of Appeal Before The Ld.Cit(A) Are As Follows :

delay of 886 days cannot be condoned, especially, when there are no clear reasons with evidences to demonstrate that the appeal was filed with sufficient cause within the meaning of section 253(5) of the Act. 7. In the result, the appeal of the appellant society is dismissed in- limine. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 13th February

ITO, WARD-1, , TENALI vs. SMT KOGANTI VIJAYA KUMARI L/H OF LATE KOGANTI BHAVANI SANKAR, GUNTUR

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161 & 162/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Koganti Vijaya Kumari Ward-1, Tenali. L/R Of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Tenali, Guntur Dist. Pan: Clwps0224B (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.163 & 164/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Jasti Lakshmaiah, Ward-1, Tenali. Tenali, Guntur District. Pan: Agapj3292P (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri I Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: These Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guntur

253 of the Act keeping in view of the relaxation of certain provisions of specified Act extending the limitation dates by the ‘Ministry of Law & Justice’ vide Gazette Notification No. CG-DL-E-31022020-218979, dated 31/3/2020 till 30/06/2020 and the subsequent Gazette Notification No. CG-DL- E-24062020-220145, dated 24/06/2020 issued by the Ministry of Finance

THE ITO, WARD-1, , TENALI vs. JASTI LAKSHMAIAH, TENALI

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161 & 162/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Koganti Vijaya Kumari Ward-1, Tenali. L/R Of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Tenali, Guntur Dist. Pan: Clwps0224B (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.163 & 164/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Jasti Lakshmaiah, Ward-1, Tenali. Tenali, Guntur District. Pan: Agapj3292P (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri I Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: These Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guntur

253 of the Act keeping in view of the relaxation of certain provisions of specified Act extending the limitation dates by the ‘Ministry of Law & Justice’ vide Gazette Notification No. CG-DL-E-31022020-218979, dated 31/3/2020 till 30/06/2020 and the subsequent Gazette Notification No. CG-DL- E-24062020-220145, dated 24/06/2020 issued by the Ministry of Finance

THE ITO, WARD-1, , TENALI vs. JASTI LAKSHMAIAH, TENALI

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161 & 162/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Koganti Vijaya Kumari Ward-1, Tenali. L/R Of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Tenali, Guntur Dist. Pan: Clwps0224B (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.163 & 164/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Jasti Lakshmaiah, Ward-1, Tenali. Tenali, Guntur District. Pan: Agapj3292P (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri I Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: These Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guntur

253 of the Act keeping in view of the relaxation of certain provisions of specified Act extending the limitation dates by the ‘Ministry of Law & Justice’ vide Gazette Notification No. CG-DL-E-31022020-218979, dated 31/3/2020 till 30/06/2020 and the subsequent Gazette Notification No. CG-DL- E-24062020-220145, dated 24/06/2020 issued by the Ministry of Finance

THE ITO, WARD-1, , TENALI vs. SMT KOGANTI VIJAYA KUMARI L/H OF LATE KOGANTI BHAVANI SANKAR, TENALI

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161 & 162/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Koganti Vijaya Kumari Ward-1, Tenali. L/R Of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Tenali, Guntur Dist. Pan: Clwps0224B (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.163 & 164/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Jasti Lakshmaiah, Ward-1, Tenali. Tenali, Guntur District. Pan: Agapj3292P (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri I Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: These Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guntur

253 of the Act keeping in view of the relaxation of certain provisions of specified Act extending the limitation dates by the ‘Ministry of Law & Justice’ vide Gazette Notification No. CG-DL-E-31022020-218979, dated 31/3/2020 till 30/06/2020 and the subsequent Gazette Notification No. CG-DL- E-24062020-220145, dated 24/06/2020 issued by the Ministry of Finance

BODURI SRINIVASA RAO,AMALAPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AMALAPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.14/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Vs. Boduri Srinivasa Rao Income Tax Officer – Ward – 1 Income Tax Office D.No.3-122, Near Samanas Lock College Road, Konkapalli Road Amalapuram Mandal Amalapuram – 533201 East Godavari District – 533221 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aoopb3039A]

section 144 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) dated 19.03.2022. At the outset, it is observed from the appeal record that there is a 2. delay of 253 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has not filed any petition seeking for condonation