ACIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad, Hyderabad v. Yalamanchili Sai Babu, Hyderabad, Hyderabad

ITA 1740/HYD/2016 | 2012-2013
Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2019 | Result: Partly Allowed

Our System has flagged this appeal as eligible for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. If you are party to this appeal, get on a Free Consultation Call with our team of Legal Experts who shall guide you as to how you can save huge Interest and Penalty in VSV Scheme.


Apply Now
        
Try VSV Calculator

Appeal Details

RSA Number 174022514 RSA 2016
Assessee PAN AANPY5312Q
Bench Hyderabad
Appeal Number ITA 1740/HYD/2016
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 28 day(s)
Appellant ACIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad, Hyderabad
Respondent Yalamanchili Sai Babu, Hyderabad, Hyderabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 25-11-2019
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted DB-B
Tribunal Order Date 25-11-2019
Date Of Final Hearing 25-11-2019
Next Hearing Date 25-11-2019
Last Hearing Date 10-12-2018
First Hearing Date 16-05-2018
Assessment Year 2012-2013
Appeal Filed On 28-12-2016
Judgment Text
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