Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT

464 ITR 430High Court2024#274 most cited
288

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Hexaware Technologies Ltd v ACIT · Section 148 · Section 148A · Section 151A · faceless reassessment · income escaping assessment · order under Section 148A(d) · non-speaking order · validity of reassessment notice

Also reported as

162 Taxmann.com 225

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 147Section 144BSection 148ASection 151ASection 151Section 69ASection 250
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

doctrine of mergersection 151asection 144b(1)faceless assessment schemefaceless assessmentsection 148anon-speaking ordersection 148a(d)section 148a(b)income escaping assessmentorder under section 148a(d)section 151

Judgments citing Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT

Digambar Ramchandra Sawant Bhosle, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer 1 (1), Thane

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical

ITA 1772/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah/Ms. Mitali Parekh, ARSFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, (Sr.DR)
Section 144BSection 147Section 68

…s submitted that as per the provisions of s.151A of the Act, the jurisdiction in case of the assessee to carry out the reassessment proceedings was vested with only the Faceless authorities. Reliance is placed on the case of Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT 464 ITR 430. 4. In ground no.2 the assessee has agitated the confirmation of the addition of Rs.31,00,663/- made by the AO on account of ad hoc account disallowance of expenses. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee did not file its return for the year under consideration whereas as per Insight Portal the assessee earned rent income of Rs.1,89,640/-…

Thomas Victor, Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer, Non Corp Ward 19(6), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2987/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.R. Venkata Raman, CA
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 271D

…[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, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai vs. Ei Resorts & Clubs Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

3213/Mum/2025

ITA 3926/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…re, the impugned notice issued by the AO is invalid and liable to be quashed and set aside. (iv) The AR relied on the following jurisdictional and non- jurisdictional high court / Tribunal decisions: a. Hexaware Technologies Limited v. ACIT reported in [2024] 464 ITR 430 (Bombay HC) Notice under section 148 was issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of Faceless Officer in contravention of scheme of Faceless assessment. The Hon HC held that, there is no question of concurrent jurisdiction of the JAO and the FAO for issuance of notice under section 148 or even for passing assessment or reassessment ord…

DCIT, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai vs. E I Resorts and Clubs Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

3213/Mum/2025

ITA 3886/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…re, the impugned notice issued by the AO is invalid and liable to be quashed and set aside. (iv) The AR relied on the following jurisdictional and non- jurisdictional high court / Tribunal decisions: a. Hexaware Technologies Limited v. ACIT reported in [2024] 464 ITR 430 (Bombay HC) Notice under section 148 was issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of Faceless Officer in contravention of scheme of Faceless assessment. The Hon HC held that, there is no question of concurrent jurisdiction of the JAO and the FAO for issuance of notice under section 148 or even for passing assessment or reassessment ord…

Tarun Nandkumar Seksaria, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -8(1), Mumbai

ITA 3239/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…re, the impugned notice issued by the AO is invalid and liable to be quashed and set aside. (iv) The AR relied on the following jurisdictional and non- jurisdictional high court / Tribunal decisions: a. Hexaware Technologies Limited v. ACIT reported in [2024] 464 ITR 430 (Bombay HC) Notice under section 148 was issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of Faceless Officer in contravention of scheme of Faceless assessment. 43. 1. The Hon HC held that, there is no question of concurrent jurisdiction of the JAO and the FAO for issuance of notice under section 148 or even for passing assessment or reassessm…

Ei Beneficiary Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -8(1), Mumbai

3230/Mum/2025

ITA 3235/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…re, the impugned notice issued by the AO is invalid and liable to be quashed and set aside. (iv) The AR relied on the following jurisdictional and non- jurisdictional high court / Tribunal decisions: a. Hexaware Technologies Limited v. ACIT reported in [2024] 464 ITR 430 (Bombay HC) Notice under section 148 was issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of Faceless Officer in contravention of scheme of Faceless assessment. The Hon HC held that, there is no question of concurrent jurisdiction of the JAO and the FAO for issuance of notice under section 148 or even for passing assessment or reassessment orde…

Ei Beneficary Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -8(1), Mumbai

3230/Mum/2025 Govind

ITA 3234/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…e, the impugned notice issued by the AO is invalid and liable to be quashed and set aside. (iv) The AR relied on the following jurisdictional and non- jurisdictional high court / Tribunal decisions: a. Hexaware Technologies Limited v. ACIT reported in [2024] 464 ITR 430 (Bombay HC) Notice under section 148 was issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of Faceless Officer in contravention of scheme of Faceless assessment. The Hon HC held that, there is no question of concurrent jurisdiction of the JAO and the FAO for issuance of notice under section 148 or even for passing assessment or reassessment ord…

Govind Corporation, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -8(1), Mumbai

ITA 3230/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…e, the impugned notice issued by the AO is invalid and liable to be quashed and set aside. (iv) The AR relied on the following jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional high court / Tribunal decisions: a. Hexaware Technologies Limited v. ACIT reported in [2024] 464 ITR 430 (Bombay HC) Notice under section 148 was issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of Faceless Officer in contravention of scheme of Faceless assessment. The Hon HC held that, there is no question of concurrent jurisdiction of the JAO and the FAO for issuance of notice under section 148 or even for passing assessment or reassessment or…

Tarun Nandkumar Seksaria, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -8(1), Mumbai

ITA 3216/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…, the impugned notice issued by the AO is invalid and liable to be quashed and set aside. (iv) The AR relied on the following jurisdictional and non- jurisdictional high court / Tribunal decisions: a. Hexaware Technologies Limited v. ACIT reported in [2024] 464 ITR 430 (Bombay HC) Notice under section 148 was issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of Faceless Officer in contravention of scheme of Faceless assessment. 43. 1. The Hon HC held that, there is no question of concurrent jurisdiction of the JAO and the FAO for issuance of notice under Section 148 or even for passing assessment or reasses…

Tarun Nandkumar Seksaria, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 8(1), Mumbai

ITA 3215/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…re, the impugned notice issued by the AO is invalid and liable to be quashed and set aside. (iv) The AR relied on the following jurisdictional and non- jurisdictional high court / Tribunal decisions: a. Hexaware Technologies Limited v. ACIT reported in [2024] 464 ITR 430 (Bombay HC) Notice under Section 148 was issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of Faceless Officer in contravention of scheme of Faceless assessment. 43. 1. The Hon HC held that, there is no question of concurrent jurisdiction of the JAO and the FAO for issuance of notice under Section 148 or even for passing assessment or reasses…

Ei Resorts and Clubs Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -8(1), Mumbai

3213/Mum/2025

ITA 3213/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2012-13
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

…, the impugned notice issued by the AO is invalid and liable to be quashed and set aside. (iv) The AR relied on the following jurisdictional and non- jurisdictional high court / Tribunal decisions: a. Hexaware Technologies Limited v. ACIT reported in [2024] 464 ITR 430 (Bombay HC) Notice under section 148 was issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of Faceless Officer in contravention of scheme of Faceless assessment. The Hon HC held that, there is no question of concurrent jurisdiction of the JAO and the FAO for issuance of notice under Section 148 or even for passing assessment or reassessment or…

Deepesh Vishnu Agarwal, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 1(2)(1), Surat

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 168/SRT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.168/Srt/2025 Assessment Years: 2019-20 (Hybrid Hearing) Depesh Vishnu Agarwal Income Tax Officer, Ward- बनाम/ A-301, Surya Plaza, U.M. 1(2),(1), Surat (Old Ward- Vs. Road, Surat-395 007 1(2)(6), Surat) Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat- 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aispa2948 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.122/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Income Tax Officer, Ward- Depesh Vishnu Agarwal बनाम/ 1(2),(1), Surat (Old Ward- A-301, Surya Plaza, U.M. Vs. 1(2)(6), Surat) Aaykar Road, Surat-395 007 Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat- 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aispa 2948 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Manish Malpani, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 30/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 27/10/2025

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149ASection 250Section 69Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.168/SRT/2025 Assessment Years: 2019-20 (Hybrid hearing) Depesh Vishnu Agarwal Income Tax Officer, Ward- बनाम/ A-301, Surya Plaza, U.M. 1(2),(1), Surat (old ward- Vs. Road, Surat-395 007 1(2)(6), Surat) Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat- 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AISPA2948 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.122/SRT/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Income Tax Officer, Ward- Depesh Vishnu Agarwal बनाम/ 1(2)…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), Surat vs. Deepesh Vishnu Agarwal, Surat

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 122/SRT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.168/Srt/2025 Assessment Years: 2019-20 (Hybrid Hearing) Depesh Vishnu Agarwal Income Tax Officer, Ward- बनाम/ A-301, Surya Plaza, U.M. 1(2),(1), Surat (Old Ward- Vs. Road, Surat-395 007 1(2)(6), Surat) Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat- 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aispa2948 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.122/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Income Tax Officer, Ward- Depesh Vishnu Agarwal बनाम/ 1(2),(1), Surat (Old Ward- A-301, Surya Plaza, U.M. Vs. 1(2)(6), Surat) Aaykar Road, Surat-395 007 Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat- 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aispa 2948 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Manish Malpani, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 30/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 27/10/2025

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149ASection 250Section 69Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.168/SRT/2025 Assessment Years: 2019-20 (Hybrid hearing) Depesh Vishnu Agarwal Income Tax Officer, Ward- बनाम/ A-301, Surya Plaza, U.M. 1(2),(1), Surat (old ward- Vs. Road, Surat-395 007 1(2)(6), Surat) Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat- 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AISPA2948 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.122/SRT/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Income Tax Officer, Ward- Depesh Vishnu Agarwal बनाम/ 1(2)…

Sudha, Tirunelveli vs. ITO, Ward-4, Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms above

ITA 2360/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2360/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 V. Sudha, The Ito, 4-254, Panchayat Street, Ward-4, Avaraikulam, Tirunelveli. Radhapuram, Tirunelveli-627 133. [Pan: Gbtps 0255 K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr.Krishna Murthy AT, JCIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

…tion dated 29.03.2022 is directly applicable in this case. 7. The Hon’ble Telangana High Court in Kankanala Ravindra Reddy Vs ITO (2023) 156 taxmann.com 178 (Telangana) and Hon’ble Bombay High Sudha :: 4 :: Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) has decided the controversy in favour of the assessee. 8. 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 C…

Sri Ramalingam Radha, Namakkal vs. ACIT, Circl-I, Erode

ITA 2342/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2342/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sri Ramalingam Radha, Oa-13, Kumaresapuram, 7Th Street, Rajiv Nagar, Tiruchengode, Namakkal-637 211. [Pan: Accpr 2234 H] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement V. The Acit, Circle-1, Erode. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Mr.R. Venkata Raman, Fca : Mr.Krishna Murthy At, Jcit : 22.10.2025 : 27.10.2025 आदेश / Order Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: The Captioned Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 26.06.2025 For Ay 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Not Justified In Dismissing The Appeal, On The Ground That The Assessee Did Not Respond To Three Notices Issued. 2. Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax Tax (Appeals) Ought Not To Have Relied On A Few Decisions Rendered Under Other Acts & On A Few Under The Income Tax Act, None Of Which Apply To The Facts Of The Assessee'S Case. :: 2 ::

Section 144BSection 147Section 148

…aid CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022 is directly applicable in this case. 7. 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. 8. 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 Court i…

Pichaimani Gunasundari, Kancheepuram vs. ITO, Nc-22(1), Tambaram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms above

ITA 2333/CHNY/2025[2019-20 ]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2333/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 V. Pichaimani Gunasundari, The Ito, No.65, Saratha Flats, Non-Corporate Ward-22(1), Ganapathi Nagar, Tambaram. 4Th Street, Urapakkam, Kancheepuram-603 210. [Pan: Cqgpg 6518 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.N. Arjunraj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Krishna Murthy AT, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250(6)Section 69Section 69A

…2022 is directly applicable in this case. 7. The Hon’ble Telangana High Court in Kankanala Ravindra Reddy Vs ITO (2023) 156 taxmann.com 178 (Telangana) and Hon’ble Bombay High Pichaimani Gunasundari :: 5 :: Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) has decided the controversy in favour of the assessee. 8. 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 C…

Bakiavathy Raghupathy, Tiruvarur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tiruvarur

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

ITA 2325/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2325/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Bakiavathy Raghupathy, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 43, Ayyanar Koil Street, Tiruvarur, Ward 1, Atp District 610 001, Tiruvarur. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Aafpr7084Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Hitesh, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.P. Solomon, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 01.07.2025 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 Short], On Merits, The Assessee Also Challenged Confirmation Of Addition

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.P. Solomon, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘‘सी’’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ऐम. बालगनेश, लेखा सद" एवं "ी एस.एस. िव"ने" रिव, "ाियक सद" के सम" Before Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2325/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Bakiavathy Raghupathy, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 43, Ayyanar Koil Street, Tiruvarur, Ward 1, ATP District 610 001, Tiruvarur. Tamil Nadu. [PAN: AAFPR7084Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Hitesh, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by : Shr…

Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education & Research (Maher), Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward 3, Chennai

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

ITA 2323/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2323/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Meenakshi Academy Of Higher Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Education & Research [Maher], Exemptions Ward 3, 12, Vembuli Amman Koil Street, Chennai. West K.K. Nagar, Chennai 600 078. [Pan: Aaetm9880C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.P. Solomon, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 08.08.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. When The Appeal Was Taken Up For Hearing, The Ld. Ar Shri R. Venkata Raman, Ca Drew Our Attention To The Application Seeking Permission To File Additional Grounds Of Appeal Dated 23.10.2025 Placed

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman, CAFor Respondent: Shri C.P. Solomon, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

…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 23.03.2023 passed by the assessment unit of NFAC is bad in law and it is quashed. The ld. AR prayed to keep open grounds of appeal filed along with Form 36 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 o…

Anandavadi Primary Agrl Coop Credit Society Limited R777, Sendurai vs. Income Tax Officer, Perambalur

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

ITA 2320/CHNY/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2320/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Anandavadi Primary Agril. Co-Op. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Credit Society Limited R777, Chinna Perambalur. Anandavadi, Sendurai, Ariyalur 621718, Perambalur, Tamil Nadu [Pan: Aatfa1893N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.P. Solomon, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.07.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. When The Appeal Was Taken Up For Hearing, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Any Adjournment Petition Filed, But, However, Filed An Application Seeking Permission To File Additional

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri C.P. Solomon, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…sessing Officer, but, however, liberty was given to the 4 I.T.A. No.2320/Chny/25 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 23.03.2023 passed by the assessment unit of NFAC is bad in law and it is quashed. The ld. AR prayed to keep open grounds of appeal filed along with Form 36 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 o…

Asmath Basha Akthar Basha, Salem vs. ITO, Ward-1, Krishnagiri

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

ITA 2314/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2314/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Asmath Basha Akthar Basha, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, D. No. 51-9, Bharathi Nagar, Iind Ward 1, Cross, Newpet, Krishnagiri 635 001, Krishnagiri. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Afgpa0229L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Bhupendran, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.P. Solomon, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.06.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. When The Appeal Was Taken Up For Hearing, The Ld. Ar Shri S. Bhupendran, Advocate Drew Our Attention To The Application Seeking Permission To File Additional Grounds Of Appeal Dated 10.10.2025 Placed

For Appellant: Shri S. Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.P. Solomon, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

…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 23.03.2023 passed by the assessment unit of NFAC is bad in law and it is quashed. The ld. AR prayed to keep open grounds of appeal filed along with Form 36 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 o…