Judgements by Poojitha Raam Vinay

This appeal of Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-12, Hyderabad dated 13.03.2020 pertaining to A.Y. 2006-07.

This assessee�s appeal for AY.2011-12 arises from the CIT(A)-6, Hyderabad�s order dated 31-08-2020 passed in case No.10426/2018-19/A3/CIT(A)-6, in proceedings u/s.144.

This is assessee’s appeal for the A.Y 2018-19 against the order, dated 26.04.2019 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi in respect of the appeal filed by the assessee before the CIT (A) Tirupati.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) � 15, Chennai, dated 30.08.2019 and pertains to assessment year 2016-17.

These are cross appeals by the assessee and Revenue. These appeals and are directed against the final assessment orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the I.T.Act. The relevant assessment years are 2010-2011 and 2011-2012.

Present appeals are filed by the assessee against the common order dated 25/03/2019 passed by the Ld.CIT(A) Mangaluru for assessment year 2015-16 and 2016-17 on the following grounds. At the outset the Ld.Counsel submitted that issues raised by asses

These six Revenue�s appeals for AYs.2008-09 to 2013-14; in seriatim, arise against the CIT(A)-12, Hyderabad�s separate orders dt.21-07-2016, 16-03-2016, 17-03-2016 & 21-07-2016 passed in case Nos.0039, 0038, 0278, 0267, 0037 & 0036/2015-16 & 2014-15,

The instant batch of three cases pertains to two assessees�s group concerns M/s.Rain Industries Limited and M/s.Rain Cements Limited. These three appeals for AYs.2013- 14 & 2014-15; seriatim-wise, arise against the DCIT, Circle- 3(1), assessments dt.

The present appeal has been f i led by the assessee against the orders of ld. CIT (A)-27, New Delhi dated 30.12.2015.

Aggrieved by the order dated 27.06.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-38, New Delhi ("Ld. CIT(A)") for the assessment year 2014-15 in the case of PNB Housing Finance Ltd., (“the assessee”), the Revenue preferred this appeal. The