S 1284 THATHAIYANGARPATTY PACCS LTD.,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, WARD-2,, NAMAKKAL
What did the Tribunal hold?
For AY 2017-18, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, remanding the issue to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. For AY 2018-19, the Tribunal held that the notice under Section 148 was invalid due to the incorrect sanctioning authority, thus quashing the assessment.
What were the facts?
For AY 2017-18, the assessee's appeal was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration due to insufficient documentation regarding additions made under Section 69A. For AY 2018-19, the assessee challenged the validity of the notice issued under Section 148 due to improper sanctioning authority.
What were the issues?
Whether the addition made under Section 69A for AY 2017-18 requires fresh consideration by the CIT(A). Whether the notice issued under Section 148 for AY 2018-19 was invalid due to the sanctioning authority not complying with Section 151.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 69A,Section 80P,Section 139(1),Section 148,Section 148A,Section 149,Section 151,Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji3,926 citing167 ITR 471 · 1987 · SC
- Core Logistic Company v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax26 citing175 Taxmann.com 453 · 2025 · HC
- Giriraj Commercial (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India12 citing169 Taxmann.com 168 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE KAND MS. PADMAVATHY.S
PER PADMAVATHY.S, A.M: These appeals by the assessee are against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short "CIT(A)") passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") dated 29.07.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2017- 18 dated 15.07.2025 for A.Y 2018-19. ITA Nos.3171 & 3172/Chny/2025 S 1284 Thathaiyangarpatty Primary Agricult
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ramesh K Devadiga And Ors vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co-Operative Housing Society LTD And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Permender Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026