SRI SAHASRALINGESWARA SWAMY TEMPLE,PONNUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD, GUNTUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis for the A

Bench: The Tribunal, The Assessee Filed Appeals (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”] Vide Respective Din & Order No. As Stated Below: -

12A. ….. (2) Where an application has been made on or after the 1st day of June, 2007, the provisions of sections 11 and 12 shall apply in relation to the income of such trust or institution from the assessment year immediately following the financial year in which such application is made: Provided that where registration has been granted

SRI SAHASRALINGESWARA SWAMY TEMPLE,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), GUNTUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis for the A

Bench: The Tribunal, The Assessee Filed Appeals (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”] Vide Respective Din & Order No. As Stated Below: -

12A. ….. (2) Where an application has been made on or after the 1st day of June, 2007, the provisions of sections 11 and 12 shall apply in relation to the income of such trust or institution from the assessment year immediately following the financial year in which such application is made: Provided that where registration has been granted

ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI PRAKASH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, TUNI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue for the

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

12A, as the Commissioner thought it fit to refuse to condone the long delay caused by the assessee in applying for the registration. Therefore, the Assessing Officer had no other option but to complete the assessments in the status of AOP also closing his eyes towards Section 11 and Section 13. To that extent, the Assessing Officer was right

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS,, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI PRAKASHA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,, TUNII

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue for the

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

12A, as the Commissioner thought it fit to refuse to condone the long delay caused by the assessee in applying for the registration. Therefore, the Assessing Officer had no other option but to complete the assessments in the status of AOP also closing his eyes towards Section 11 and Section 13. To that extent, the Assessing Officer was right

ACIT, (EXEMPTIONS), EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI PRAKASH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,, TUNI,

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue for the

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

12A, as the Commissioner thought it fit to refuse to condone the long delay caused by the assessee in applying for the registration. Therefore, the Assessing Officer had no other option but to complete the assessments in the status of AOP also closing his eyes towards Section 11 and Section 13. To that extent, the Assessing Officer was right

SRI KOTI LINGA HARI HARA MAHAKSHETRAM TEMPLE,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WD, RAJAHMUNDRY

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.365/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Sri Koti Linga Hari Hara Vs. Income Tax Officer, Mahakshetram Temple, Exemption Ward, Visakhapatnam. Rajahmundry. Pan: Acgfs3064C (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri Cr Hemanth Kumar, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 03/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 07/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm :

Section 12A(2) In the Finance Act 2014 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the initiation of reassessment

ACIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. MOTHER THERESSA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, CHAITANYANAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

12A r.w.s. 12AA(1)(b) of the Act vide Registration No. H.QRS/III/114/2003-04 dated 28.10.2005 and also registered under section 80G of the Act vide Registration No. F.NO. H.QRS/III/107 80G on 29.01.2010 by the CIT, Rajahmundry. The assessee filed its return of income declaring NIL income after claiming of application of income under section

MOTHER THERESSA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,AMALAPURAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

12A r.w.s. 12AA(1)(b) of the Act vide Registration No. H.QRS/III/114/2003-04 dated 28.10.2005 and also registered under section 80G of the Act vide Registration No. F.NO. H.QRS/III/107 80G on 29.01.2010 by the CIT, Rajahmundry. The assessee filed its return of income declaring NIL income after claiming of application of income under section

SRI KSHEERA RAMALINGESWARA SWAMY TEMPLE,PALAKOL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), RAJAHMUNDRY

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.199/Viz/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sri Ksheera Ramalingeswara Vs. Income Tax Officer Swamy Temple, (Exemptions), Palakol. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aakas5615E (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 30/09/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm : The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Society Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 15/05/2023, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”), Dated 28/12/2019 For A.Y. 2017-18. 2 I Sri Ksheera Ramalingeswara Swamy Temple Vs. Ito (Exemptions)

12A of the Act w.e.f 17/07/2017, i.e., from the AY 2018-19 only and was not holding the said registration during the subject year, i.e., AY 2017-18, thus, declined its claim for exemption U/s. 11 of the Act. Accordingly, the AO, vide his order passed U/s. 144 of the Act, dated 28/12/2019, determined the income of the assessee society

THE SOCIETY OF JESUS MARY JOSEPH SNEHALAYA,MANGALAGIRI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,WARD-2(1), GUNTUR

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

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

12A of IT Act, 1961 vide proceedings of CIT, Guntur No. 1/137/GNT/87-88 dated 28.12.1990. Specific information was flagged as per Risk Management Strategy formulated by the CBDT through Insight Portal under the head ‘NMS cases’ and as per the information received by the Assessing Officer, the assessee has carried out following transactions during the financial year 2014-15, relevant

VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VMRDA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

reassessment order and the ld. CIT(A)’s order. The reasons for reopening the assessment were mentioned in page No. 19 of ld. CIT(A)’s order and from which it is found that assessee was carrying the commercial activities like sale of plots, constructed houses, sale of plants, saplings etc. which were mentioned in earlier paragraphs of this order

M/S. VISAKHAPATNAM URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY(VUDA),,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE CIT, (EXEMPTIONS),, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

reassessment order and the ld. CIT(A)’s order. The reasons for reopening the assessment were mentioned in page No. 19 of ld. CIT(A)’s order and from which it is found that assessee was carrying the commercial activities like sale of plots, constructed houses, sale of plants, saplings etc. which were mentioned in earlier paragraphs of this order

M/S. VISAKHAPATNAM URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY(VUDA),,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE CIT, (EXEMPTIONS),, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

reassessment order and the ld. CIT(A)’s order. The reasons for reopening the assessment were mentioned in page No. 19 of ld. CIT(A)’s order and from which it is found that assessee was carrying the commercial activities like sale of plots, constructed houses, sale of plants, saplings etc. which were mentioned in earlier paragraphs of this order

VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VMRDA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

reassessment order and the ld. CIT(A)’s order. The reasons for reopening the assessment were mentioned in page No. 19 of ld. CIT(A)’s order and from which it is found that assessee was carrying the commercial activities like sale of plots, constructed houses, sale of plants, saplings etc. which were mentioned in earlier paragraphs of this order

VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VMRDA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

reassessment order and the ld. CIT(A)’s order. The reasons for reopening the assessment were mentioned in page No. 19 of ld. CIT(A)’s order and from which it is found that assessee was carrying the commercial activities like sale of plots, constructed houses, sale of plants, saplings etc. which were mentioned in earlier paragraphs of this order

VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VMRDA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

reassessment order and the ld. CIT(A)’s order. The reasons for reopening the assessment were mentioned in page No. 19 of ld. CIT(A)’s order and from which it is found that assessee was carrying the commercial activities like sale of plots, constructed houses, sale of plants, saplings etc. which were mentioned in earlier paragraphs of this order

M/S. VISAKHAPATNAM URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY(VUDA),,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE CIT, (EXEMPTIONS),, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

reassessment order and the ld. CIT(A)’s order. The reasons for reopening the assessment were mentioned in page No. 19 of ld. CIT(A)’s order and from which it is found that assessee was carrying the commercial activities like sale of plots, constructed houses, sale of plants, saplings etc. which were mentioned in earlier paragraphs of this order

VISWAMANAVA SAMAIKYATA SAMSAT,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTIONS), GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 278/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2014-15) M/S. Viswamanava Samikyata Vs. Income Tax Officer Samsat, Guntur. (Exemptions), Pan: Aaatv 1597 P Guntur. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02/04/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 28/05/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

12A of the Act. The assessee filed its return of income for the AY 2014-15 on 14/08/2014 admitting total income at NIL. The scrutiny assessment U/s. 143(3) of the Act was completed on 14/12/2016 accepting the income returned by the assessee. Subsequently, the case was reopened after obtaining necessary approvals from the competent authority and accordingly notices