Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT (464 ITR 430)

T.C. 30 Thothukudi Port Aluvalar Co-Op Thrift and Credit Society Ltd., Thoothukudi vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tutucorin

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1945/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1945/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 T.C. 30, Thoothukudi Port Aluvalar Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Co-Op. Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., Ward 1, Thoothukudi 628 004. Tuticorin. [Pan:Aagat3402L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 04.06.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. In The Grounds Of Appeal, Besides Challenging Assumption Of Jurisdiction Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In 2

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 80P

…d by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, but, however, liberty was given to the Revenue to re-ignite the notice in case the Hon’ble Supreme Court interferes with the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Hexaware Technologies Ltd. V. ACIT 464 ITR 430 (Bombay). Accordingly, we hold that the assessment order dated 29.02.2024 passed by the assessment unit of NFAC is bad in law and it is quashed. The ld. AR prayed to keep open ground No. 4 for the assessee in case the Hon’ble Supreme Court interferes with the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Hexaware Technologies Ltd. V…

DCIT Cen 5 3, Mumbai vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1682/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar

Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 1679, 1680, 1681 & 1682/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2015-16 to 2017-18 DCIT CEN 5 3, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Co. Ltd., Vs. Complex, Bandra (East), 3rd floor, ICICI Lombard House, 414, Mumbai-400051. Veer Savarkar Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400025. PAN NO. AAACI 7904 G Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Anish Thackar : Mr. R A Dhyani, CIT DR & Revenue by Mr. V.S. Mahajan, Sr. DR : 03 /07/2025 Date of Hea…

DCIT Cen 5 3, Mumbai vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1681/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar

Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 1679, 1680, 1681 & 1682/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2015-16 to 2017-18 DCIT CEN 5 3, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Co. Ltd., Vs. Complex, Bandra (East), 3rd floor, ICICI Lombard House, 414, Mumbai-400051. Veer Savarkar Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400025. PAN NO. AAACI 7904 G Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Anish Thackar : Mr. R A Dhyani, CIT DR & Revenue by Mr. V.S. Mahajan, Sr. DR : 03 /07/2025 Date of Hea…

DCIT Cen 5 3, Mumbai vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1680/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar

Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 1679, 1680, 1681 & 1682/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2015-16 to 2017-18 DCIT CEN 5 3, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Co. Ltd., Vs. Complex, Bandra (East), 3rd floor, ICICI Lombard House, 414, Mumbai-400051. Veer Savarkar Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400025. PAN NO. AAACI 7904 G Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Anish Thackar : Mr. R A Dhyani, CIT DR & Revenue by Mr. V.S. Mahajan, Sr. DR : 03 /07/2025 Date of Hea…

DCIT Cen 5 3, Mumbai vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1679/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar

Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 1679, 1680, 1681 & 1682/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2015-16 to 2017-18 DCIT CEN 5 3, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Co. Ltd., Vs. Complex, Bandra (East), 3rd floor, ICICI Lombard House, 414, Mumbai-400051. Veer Savarkar Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400025. PAN NO. AAACI 7904 G Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Anish Thackar : Mr. R A Dhyani, CIT DR & Revenue by Mr. V.S. Mahajan, Sr. DR : 03 /07/2025 Date of Hea…

Thangamuthu Balakrishnan, Tiruppur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Tiruppur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 719/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 719/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Mr. T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A '(For Respondent: Mr. C. Sivakumar, Addl. CIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69A

…aid CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022 is directly applicable in this case. 6. The Hon’ble Telangana High Court in Kankanala Ravindra Reddy Vs ITO (2023) 156 taxmann.com 178 (Telangana) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs.ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) has decided the controversy in favour of the assessee. Furthermore, the above view is affirmed by the Hon’ble Telangana High Court in M/s.Ta Infra Projects Limited Vs The DCIT [Writ Petition Nos.26645, 26654, 26667, 28497, 26788 of 2024 and 12437, 9561, 14549, 14664, 14674, 12873 of 2025 dated 14.07.2025], following the judgments of the Hon…

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. 63 Moons Technologies Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2112/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar Syal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 35(1)(ii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2110, 2111 and 2112/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 DCIT(CC)-8(3), 63 Moons Technologies Mumbai Limited FT Tower, CTS No. 256-257, Suren Road, Chakala, Vs. Chakala MIDC SO, Andheri (East), Mumbai - 400093 (PAN: AAACF5737C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri Sukhsagar Syal, Advocate Revenue : Shri Umashankar Prasad, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 21.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 22.09.2025 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT…

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. 63 Moons Technologies Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2111/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar Syal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 35(1)(ii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2110, 2111 and 2112/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 DCIT(CC)-8(3), 63 Moons Technologies Mumbai Limited FT Tower, CTS No. 256-257, Suren Road, Chakala, Vs. Chakala MIDC SO, Andheri (East), Mumbai - 400093 (PAN: AAACF5737C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri Sukhsagar Syal, Advocate Revenue : Shri Umashankar Prasad, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 21.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 22.09.2025 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT…

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. 63 Moons Technologies Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2110/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar Syal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 35(1)(ii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2110, 2111 and 2112/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 DCIT(CC)-8(3), 63 Moons Technologies Mumbai Limited FT Tower, CTS No. 256-257, Suren Road, Chakala, Vs. Chakala MIDC SO, Andheri (East), Mumbai - 400093 (PAN: AAACF5737C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri Sukhsagar Syal, Advocate Revenue : Shri Umashankar Prasad, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 21.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 22.09.2025 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT…

Sanchit Kantilal Ganore, Bhagur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Nashik

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1767/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1767/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sanchit Kantilal Ganore, V The Income Tax Officer, 21, Main Road, Bhagur, S. Ward-1(1), Nashik. Nashik - 422502. Pan: Aprpg4907J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Piyush Bafna Revenue By Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar– Add.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 09/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2017-18, Dated 29.05.2025 Emanating From Assessment Order U/S.147 R.W.S 144 Of The I.T.Act, Dated 21.05.2023. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law & Without Prejudice To Other Grounds, Ld. Nfac Has Erred In Passing A

Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250

…ich is beyond the period of 6 years as per section 149 because fifth proviso to section 148 cannot apply in a case where the first proviso applies and thus, as per the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Hexaware Technologies - 464 ITR 430 and Godrej Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2024] 160 taxmann.com 13, the present notice issued u/s 148 is bad in law and thus, may please be quashed. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law. Ld NFAC has erred in upholding the illegal order passed by the Ld. NaFAG since the Notice u/s 148 dated 13-04-2022 was issued by Juri…

The Chennai Co-Op. Societies Employees Co-Op. and Society Ltd., Chennai vs. PCIT-8, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1157/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.B. Suresh, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Bipin C.N., CIT

Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 148Section 151ASection 263Section 80ASection 80P

…[DB] - WA No. 781 OF 2025, order dated 24.06.2025 2 14.09.2023 Kankanala Ravindra Reddy v. Income-tax Officer High Court of Telangana - 156 taxmann.com 178 3 03.05.2024 Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income- tax High Court of Bombay - 464 ITR 430 4 20.05.2024 Ram Narayan Sah v. Union of India - High Court of Gauhati 163 taxmann.com 478 5 02.07.2024 Sushila Sureshbabu Malge v. Income-tax Officer - High Court of Bombay - 468 ITR 624 6 19.07.2024 Jatinder Singh Bhangu v. Union of India High Court of Punjab & Haryana - 466 ITR 474 7 24.07.2024 Sri Venkataramana Reddy Patloola v. Deputy Commis…

Jagdish Raghunathji Lahoti, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel 23(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1999/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhri & Jagdish Raghunathji Lahoti Assistant Commissioner, 27/31, 4Th Floor, Bootwala Vs. Circle 23(1), Mumbai Building, Old Hanuman Lane, 113, 1St Floor, Matru Mandir, Kalbadevi 400002 Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400007 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Abxpl4596N (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्ााररती की ओर से / Assessee By: Shri. Ajinkya Vaishampayan /Revenue By: Shri Vivek Perampurna Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 13.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.09.2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Renu Jauhri [A.M]: These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] Dated 24.01.2025 Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "Act"] For Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2014-15 & 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri. Ajinkya VaishampayanFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 250Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Jagdish Raghunathji Lahoti Assistant Commissioner, 27/31, 4th Floor, Bootwala Vs. Circle 23(1), Mumbai Building, Old Hanuman Lane, 113, 1st Floor, Matru Mandir, Kalbadevi 400002 Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400007 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: ABXPL4596N (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्ााररती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri. Ajinkya Vaishampayan /Revenue by: Shri Vivek Perampurna CIT-DR Date of Hearing 13.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 18.09.2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER RENU JAUHRI [A.…

Jagdish Raghunathji Lahoti, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 23(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1998/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhri & Jagdish Raghunathji Lahoti Assistant Commissioner, 27/31, 4Th Floor, Bootwala Vs. Circle 23(1), Mumbai Building, Old Hanuman Lane, 113, 1St Floor, Matru Mandir, Kalbadevi 400002 Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400007 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Abxpl4596N (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्ााररती की ओर से / Assessee By: Shri. Ajinkya Vaishampayan /Revenue By: Shri Vivek Perampurna Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 13.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.09.2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Renu Jauhri [A.M]: These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] Dated 24.01.2025 Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "Act"] For Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2014-15 & 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri. Ajinkya VaishampayanFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 250Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Jagdish Raghunathji Lahoti Assistant Commissioner, 27/31, 4th Floor, Bootwala Vs. Circle 23(1), Mumbai Building, Old Hanuman Lane, 113, 1st Floor, Matru Mandir, Kalbadevi 400002 Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400007 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: ABXPL4596N (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्ााररती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri. Ajinkya Vaishampayan /Revenue by: Shri Vivek Perampurna CIT-DR Date of Hearing 13.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 18.09.2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER RENU JAUHRI [A.…

Nandigram Krashi Awam Gram Vikas Sanstha Suga, Nanded vs. DCIT, Exemption Circle, Aurangabad

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

ITA 1762/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B Phadke (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 133(6)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1762/PUN/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Nandigram Krashi Awam Gram DCIT, Exemption Circle, Vikas Sanstha Suga, Aurangabad Sugaon (Barhali), Taluka Mukhed, Vs. Dist. Nanded-431715 PAN : AAATG6010A अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kishor B Phadke (Virtual) Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 03-07-2025 Date of 12-09-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / ORDER PE…

Chinnappan Peter Francis, Kumbakonam vs. ITO, Ward-1, Kumbakonam

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1484/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1484/Chny/2025 धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Chinnappan Peter Ito, Francis, Vs. Ward I, No. 113, Kamraj Road, Kumbakonam. Bishops House, Kumbakonam – 612 001. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Bwspp-2816-G] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) : Mr. Y. Sridhar, F.C.A अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Appellant By प्रत्यथी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. R. Raghupathy, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2025 : 09.09.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per S.R.Raghunatha, Am. This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Dated 17.04.2025, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Nfac, Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Against The Order U/S.147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Passed By The Ito (Assessing Officer), Ward I, Thanjavur Dated 30.01.2024. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar For The Assessee Mr.Y.Sridhar, Advocate For The Assessee Has Raised An Additional Ground Relating To Jurisdiction Of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (‘Jao’) In The Light Of The Cbdt Notification Dated 29.03.2022 & The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Madras High Court In The Case Of Tvs Credit Services Ltd. Vs. Dcit (W.P.No.22402 Of 2024 Dated 24.06.2025). The Ld.Dr, Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl.Cit, Objected Admission Of Additional Ground Raised By The Assessee.

For Respondent: Mr. R. Raghupathy, Addl.CIT

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

…id CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022 is directly applicable in this case. 8. The Hon’ble Telangana High Court in Kankanala Ravindra Reddy Vs ITO (2023) 156 taxmann.com 178 (Telangana) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) has decided the controversy in favour of the assessee. 9. Furthermore, the above view is affirmed by the Hon’ble Telangana High Court in M/s.Ta Infra Projects Limited Vs The DCIT [Writ Petition Nos.26645, 26654, 26667, 28497, 26788 of 2024 and 12437, 9561, 14549, 14664, 14674, 12873 of 2025 dated 14.07.2025], following the judgments of the…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Nungambakkam vs. Pawan Cargo Forwards Pvt Ltd, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed in terms above and cross objection filed by the assessee become infructuous in terms of our above order

ITA 3116/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3116/Chny/2024 (िनधा&रणवष& / Assessment Year: 2013-14) The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Pawan Cargo Forwards Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Vs. 518, Mkn Road, Pawan Imperia, Circle-1(Ltu) Alandur Mkn Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 016. [Pan: Aaccp 2477P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: 26.06.2025

Section 148Section 148ASection 151

…is case. ITA No.3116/Chny/2024 & C.O No.3/Chny/2025 Pawan Cargo Forwards 8. The Hon’ble Telangana High Court in Kankanala Ravindra Reddy Vs ITO (2023) 156 taxmann.com 178 (Telangana) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) has decided the controversy in favour of the assessee. 9. Furthermore, the Hon’ble Telangana High Court in M/s Ta Infra Projects Limited Vs The DCIT [Writ Petition Nos.26645, 26654, 26667, 28497, 26788 of 2024 and 12437, 9561, 14549, 14664, 14674, 12873 of 2025 dated 14.07.2025], following the judgments of the Hon’ble Telangana High Cou…

Jayaraman Rudrasekar, Vellore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1142/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151A

…[DB] - WA No. 781 OF 2025, order dated 24.06.2025 2 14.09.2023 Kankanala Ravindra Reddy v. Income-tax Officer High Court of Telangana - 156 taxmann.com 178 3 03.05.2024 Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income- tax High Court of Bombay - 464 ITR 430 4 20.05.2024 Ram Narayan Sah v. Union of India - High Court of Gauhati 163 taxmann.com 478 5 02.07.2024 Sushila Sureshbabu Malge v. Income-tax Officer - High Court of Bombay - 468 ITR 624 6 19.07.2024 Jatinder Singh Bhangu v. Union of India High Court of Punjab & Haryana - 466 ITR 474 7 24.07.2024 Sri Venkataramana Reddy Patloola v. Deputy Commis…

DCIT, CC-3, Ludhiana, Kitchlu Nagar vs. Mani Ram Balwant Rai HUF, Civil Lines

In the result, Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1042/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1042/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 The Dcit, Mani Ram Balwant Rai, Huf, Central Circle-3, Vs Civil Lines, Opposite Session Court(Old) Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaghm1535C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & C.O. 43/Chd/2024 In आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1042/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Mani Ram Balwant Rai, Huf, The Dcit, Civil Lines, Opposite Session Court(Old) V Central Circle-3, Ludhiana. S Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaghm1535C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr Assessee By : Shri Pankaj Bhalla, Ca & Shri Hunny Bajaj, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.09.2025 Hybrid Hearing O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vp

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Bhalla, CA and Shri Hunny Bajaj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 132(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1042/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 The DCIT, Mani Ram Balwant Rai, HUF, Central Circle-3, Vs Civil Lines, Opposite Session Court(Old) Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAGHM1535C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & C.O. 43/CHD/2024 in आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1042/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Mani Ram Balwant Rai, HUF, The DCIT,…

Gaurav Logistics, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-4(3), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1111/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Jagadishआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita No.:1111/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Gaurav Logistics, Income Tax Officer 32, Gaurav Vara, New Avadi Road, Vs. Non Corporate Ward 4(3), Chennai 600 010. Chennai. [Pan: Aaffg-1902-L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Hithesh, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R Per George George K: This Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Delhi Dated 14.02.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. At The Very Outset, We Notice That The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Filed A Memorandum Of Addition Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Validity Of The Assumption Of Jurisdiction For Issuance Of Notice Under Section 148 Of Gaurav Logistics

For Appellant: Shri Hithesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT

Section 148Section 250

…rectly applicable in this case. 6. We find that the Hon’ble High Court of Telangana in the case of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy Vs ITO (2023) 156 taxmann.com 178 (Telangana) and Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) has decided the controversy in favour of the assessee. Further, the Hon’ble High Court Telangana in the case of M/s Ta Infra Projects Limited Vs The DCIT [Writ Petition Nos.26645, 26654, 26667, 28497, 26788 of 2024 and 12437, 9561, 14549, 14664, 14674, 12873 of 2025 dated 14.07.2025], following the decisions in the case of Kankanala Ravindr…

Vazhoor Sudarsanan Thampi, Thrissur vs. Income Tax Officer, (International Taxation), Ward-2(1), Bengaluru

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 893/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan Ka. Y. 2015-16 Appellant Respondent Vazhoor Sudarshanan The Income Tax Officer Thampi International Taxation Vazhoor House, Ward 2 (1) T C 5/1892Valappad Bangalore Vallapad Beach Thrissur Kerala 680567 Pan Afxpt6193D For Appellant Shri Sidhesh N Gadi, Ca For Respondent Dr. Divya K J Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19-08-2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28-08-2025

Section 142Section 143Section 144Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69

…ubmitted by the authorised representative that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the several high courts including Hexaware Technologies Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2024] 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay)/ [2024] 464 ITR 430 (Bombay) [03-05-2024]. 12. With respect to the second ground of appeal regarding the time barring of the assessment order, it was submitted that issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70/301 Taxman 238/469 ITR 46 and Union of India v. Ashis…

Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT

T.C. 30 Thothukudi Port Aluvalar Co-Op Thrift and Credit Society Ltd., Thoothukudi vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tutucorin

DCIT Cen 5 3, Mumbai vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Limited, Mumbai

DCIT Cen 5 3, Mumbai vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Limited, Mumbai

DCIT Cen 5 3, Mumbai vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Limited, Mumbai

DCIT Cen 5 3, Mumbai vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Limited, Mumbai

Thangamuthu Balakrishnan, Tiruppur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Tiruppur

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. 63 Moons Technologies Limited, Mumbai

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. 63 Moons Technologies Limited, Mumbai

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. 63 Moons Technologies Limited, Mumbai

Sanchit Kantilal Ganore, Bhagur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Nashik

The Chennai Co-Op. Societies Employees Co-Op. and Society Ltd., Chennai vs. PCIT-8, Chennai

Jagdish Raghunathji Lahoti, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel 23(1), Mumbai

Jagdish Raghunathji Lahoti, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 23(1), Mumbai

Nandigram Krashi Awam Gram Vikas Sanstha Suga, Nanded vs. DCIT, Exemption Circle, Aurangabad

Chinnappan Peter Francis, Kumbakonam vs. ITO, Ward-1, Kumbakonam

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Nungambakkam vs. Pawan Cargo Forwards Pvt Ltd, Chennai

Jayaraman Rudrasekar, Vellore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Chennai

DCIT, CC-3, Ludhiana, Kitchlu Nagar vs. Mani Ram Balwant Rai HUF, Civil Lines

Gaurav Logistics, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-4(3), Chennai

Vazhoor Sudarsanan Thampi, Thrissur vs. Income Tax Officer, (International Taxation), Ward-2(1), Bengaluru