Krishna Developers v. DCIT

102 Taxmann.com 51Reported decision2019#5742 most cited
20

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2024.

Judgments citing Krishna Developers v. DCIT

OM PRAKASH SHARMA,SANGANER JAIPUR vs. WARD 4(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 43/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Him. 2

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish SharmaFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री राठोड कमलेश जयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 43/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2016-17 Om Prakash Sharma, Sanganer, Jaipur बनाम ITO Vs. Ward 4(3), Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: BKOPS 5112 G अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. Ashish Sharma राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT स…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE vs. SAI SOURCING SERVICE, TIRUPUR

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 597/CHNY/2021[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं/. Ita Nos.596 & 597/Chny/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 (26Q - Q2 & Q3) M/S. Sai Sourcing Services, Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Sf No.702/1A Indira Nagar, Seventhampalayam Road, Central Processing Cell –Tds, Chandrapuram, Ghaziabad Tirupur-641608. Tamil Nadu. Pan: Abjfs 7325Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 200ASection 234E

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "याय पीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ , लेखा सद"य के सम% BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/. ITA Nos.596 & 597/Chny/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 (26Q - Q2 & Q3) M/s. Sai Sourcing Services, Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, SF No.702/1A Indira Nagar, Seventhampalayam Road, Central Processing Cell –TDS, Chandrapuram, Ghaziabad Tirupur-641608. Tamil Nadu. PAN: ABJFS 7325Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : None अपी…

SAI SOUCING SERVICES,TIRUPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 596/CHNY/2021[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं/. Ita Nos.596 & 597/Chny/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 (26Q - Q2 & Q3) M/S. Sai Sourcing Services, Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Sf No.702/1A Indira Nagar, Seventhampalayam Road, Central Processing Cell –Tds, Chandrapuram, Ghaziabad Tirupur-641608. Tamil Nadu. Pan: Abjfs 7325Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 200ASection 234E

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "याय पीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ , लेखा सद"य के सम% BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/. ITA Nos.596 & 597/Chny/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 (26Q - Q2 & Q3) M/s. Sai Sourcing Services, Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, SF No.702/1A Indira Nagar, Seventhampalayam Road, Central Processing Cell –TDS, Chandrapuram, Ghaziabad Tirupur-641608. Tamil Nadu. PAN: ABJFS 7325Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : None अपी…

WHEELS,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CPC,TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 236/CHNY/2021[2014-15(Q-1)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2022

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं/. Ita Nos.236 To 243/Chny/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) 2015-16 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) Wheels Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 16/8, Plot No. 172, Income Tax, 22Nd Cross Street, Central Processing Cell –Tds, Adyar, Besant Nagar, Ghaziabad Chennai – 600 020. Pan: Aaafw 0057D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 200ASection 234E

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals…

WHEELS,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CPC,TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 242/CHNY/2021[2015-16 (Qurt-3)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2022

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं/. Ita Nos.236 To 243/Chny/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) 2015-16 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) Wheels Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 16/8, Plot No. 172, Income Tax, 22Nd Cross Street, Central Processing Cell –Tds, Adyar, Besant Nagar, Ghaziabad Chennai – 600 020. Pan: Aaafw 0057D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 200ASection 234E

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals…

WHEELS,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CPC-TDS, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 241/CHNY/2021[2015-16(Q-2)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2022

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं/. Ita Nos.236 To 243/Chny/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) 2015-16 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) Wheels Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 16/8, Plot No. 172, Income Tax, 22Nd Cross Street, Central Processing Cell –Tds, Adyar, Besant Nagar, Ghaziabad Chennai – 600 020. Pan: Aaafw 0057D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 200ASection 234E

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals…

WHEELS,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CPC-TDS, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 240/CHNY/2021[2015-16(Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2022

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं/. Ita Nos.236 To 243/Chny/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) 2015-16 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) Wheels Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 16/8, Plot No. 172, Income Tax, 22Nd Cross Street, Central Processing Cell –Tds, Adyar, Besant Nagar, Ghaziabad Chennai – 600 020. Pan: Aaafw 0057D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 200ASection 234E

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals…

WHEELS,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CPC-TDS, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 239/CHNY/2021[2014-15(Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2022

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं/. Ita Nos.236 To 243/Chny/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) 2015-16 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) Wheels Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 16/8, Plot No. 172, Income Tax, 22Nd Cross Street, Central Processing Cell –Tds, Adyar, Besant Nagar, Ghaziabad Chennai – 600 020. Pan: Aaafw 0057D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 200ASection 234E

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals…

WHEELS,GAZIABAD vs. DCIT,CPC-TDS, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 238/CHNY/2021[2014-15(Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2022

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं/. Ita Nos.236 To 243/Chny/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) 2015-16 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) Wheels Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 16/8, Plot No. 172, Income Tax, 22Nd Cross Street, Central Processing Cell –Tds, Adyar, Besant Nagar, Ghaziabad Chennai – 600 020. Pan: Aaafw 0057D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 200ASection 234E

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals…

WHEELS,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 237/CHNY/2021[2014-15(Q-2)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2022

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं/. Ita Nos.236 To 243/Chny/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) 2015-16 (26Q – Q1 To Q4) Wheels Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 16/8, Plot No. 172, Income Tax, 22Nd Cross Street, Central Processing Cell –Tds, Adyar, Besant Nagar, Ghaziabad Chennai – 600 020. Pan: Aaafw 0057D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 200ASection 234E

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals…

WORKS MANAGER,GOVT. CENTRAL AUTOMOBILE WORKSHOP,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, TDS WARD - 3 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as

ITA 2442/CHNY/2019[2015-16 (24Q - Qtr.4)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Oct 2020

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2432 To 2442/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14(24Q-Qr2), 2013-14(24Q-Qr3), 2013-14-(24Q-Qr4), 2014-15(24Q-Qr1), 2014-15(24Q-Q2),2014-15(24Q- Qr3), 2014-15(24Q-Qr4), 2015-16(24Q-Qr1),2015-16(24Q-Qr2),2015-16 (24Q-Qr3) & 2015-16(24Q-Qr4) Vs Income Tax Officer, Works Manager Govt. Central Automobile Workshop, Chennai , Tds Ward 3(3), No.1, Velachery Main Road, Velachery, Chennai. Chennai-600 042. Pan:Aaaga 1160N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals,…

WORKS MANAGER,GOVT. CENTRAL AUTOMOBILE WORKSHOP,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, TDS WARD - 3 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as

ITA 2441/CHNY/2019[2015-16 (24Q - Qtr.3)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Oct 2020

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2432 To 2442/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14(24Q-Qr2), 2013-14(24Q-Qr3), 2013-14-(24Q-Qr4), 2014-15(24Q-Qr1), 2014-15(24Q-Q2),2014-15(24Q- Qr3), 2014-15(24Q-Qr4), 2015-16(24Q-Qr1),2015-16(24Q-Qr2),2015-16 (24Q-Qr3) & 2015-16(24Q-Qr4) Vs Income Tax Officer, Works Manager Govt. Central Automobile Workshop, Chennai , Tds Ward 3(3), No.1, Velachery Main Road, Velachery, Chennai. Chennai-600 042. Pan:Aaaga 1160N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals,…

WORKS MANAGER,GOVT. CENTRAL AUTOMOBILE WORKSHOP,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, TDS WARD - 3 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as

ITA 2440/CHNY/2019[2015-16 (24Q - Qtr.2)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Oct 2020

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2432 To 2442/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14(24Q-Qr2), 2013-14(24Q-Qr3), 2013-14-(24Q-Qr4), 2014-15(24Q-Qr1), 2014-15(24Q-Q2),2014-15(24Q- Qr3), 2014-15(24Q-Qr4), 2015-16(24Q-Qr1),2015-16(24Q-Qr2),2015-16 (24Q-Qr3) & 2015-16(24Q-Qr4) Vs Income Tax Officer, Works Manager Govt. Central Automobile Workshop, Chennai , Tds Ward 3(3), No.1, Velachery Main Road, Velachery, Chennai. Chennai-600 042. Pan:Aaaga 1160N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals,…

WORKS MANAGER,GOVT. CENTRAL AUTOMOBILE WORKSHOP,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, TDS WARD - 3 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as

ITA 2436/CHNY/2019[2014-15 (24Q- Qtr. 2)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Oct 2020

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2432 To 2442/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14(24Q-Qr2), 2013-14(24Q-Qr3), 2013-14-(24Q-Qr4), 2014-15(24Q-Qr1), 2014-15(24Q-Q2),2014-15(24Q- Qr3), 2014-15(24Q-Qr4), 2015-16(24Q-Qr1),2015-16(24Q-Qr2),2015-16 (24Q-Qr3) & 2015-16(24Q-Qr4) Vs Income Tax Officer, Works Manager Govt. Central Automobile Workshop, Chennai , Tds Ward 3(3), No.1, Velachery Main Road, Velachery, Chennai. Chennai-600 042. Pan:Aaaga 1160N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals,…

WORKS MANAGER,GOVT. CENTRAL AUTOMOBILE WORKSHOP,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, TDS WARD - 3 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as

ITA 2435/CHNY/2019[2014-15 (24Q - Qtr. 1)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Oct 2020

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2432 To 2442/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14(24Q-Qr2), 2013-14(24Q-Qr3), 2013-14-(24Q-Qr4), 2014-15(24Q-Qr1), 2014-15(24Q-Q2),2014-15(24Q- Qr3), 2014-15(24Q-Qr4), 2015-16(24Q-Qr1),2015-16(24Q-Qr2),2015-16 (24Q-Qr3) & 2015-16(24Q-Qr4) Vs Income Tax Officer, Works Manager Govt. Central Automobile Workshop, Chennai , Tds Ward 3(3), No.1, Velachery Main Road, Velachery, Chennai. Chennai-600 042. Pan:Aaaga 1160N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals,…

WORKS MANAGER,GOVT. CENTRAL AUTOMOBILE WORKSHOP,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, TDS WARD - 3 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as

ITA 2439/CHNY/2019[2015-16(24Q - Qtr.)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Oct 2020

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2432 To 2442/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14(24Q-Qr2), 2013-14(24Q-Qr3), 2013-14-(24Q-Qr4), 2014-15(24Q-Qr1), 2014-15(24Q-Q2),2014-15(24Q- Qr3), 2014-15(24Q-Qr4), 2015-16(24Q-Qr1),2015-16(24Q-Qr2),2015-16 (24Q-Qr3) & 2015-16(24Q-Qr4) Vs Income Tax Officer, Works Manager Govt. Central Automobile Workshop, Chennai , Tds Ward 3(3), No.1, Velachery Main Road, Velachery, Chennai. Chennai-600 042. Pan:Aaaga 1160N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals,…

WORKS MANAGER,GOVT. CENTRAL AUTOMOBILE WORKSHOP,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, TDS WARD - 3 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as

ITA 2438/CHNY/2019[2014-15 (24 Q - Qtr. 4)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Oct 2020

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2432 To 2442/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14(24Q-Qr2), 2013-14(24Q-Qr3), 2013-14-(24Q-Qr4), 2014-15(24Q-Qr1), 2014-15(24Q-Q2),2014-15(24Q- Qr3), 2014-15(24Q-Qr4), 2015-16(24Q-Qr1),2015-16(24Q-Qr2),2015-16 (24Q-Qr3) & 2015-16(24Q-Qr4) Vs Income Tax Officer, Works Manager Govt. Central Automobile Workshop, Chennai , Tds Ward 3(3), No.1, Velachery Main Road, Velachery, Chennai. Chennai-600 042. Pan:Aaaga 1160N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals,…

WORKS MANAGER,GOVT. CENTRAL AUTOMOBILE WORKSHOP,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, TDS WARD - 3 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as

ITA 2437/CHNY/2019[2014-15 (24Q - Qtr. 3)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Oct 2020

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2432 To 2442/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14(24Q-Qr2), 2013-14(24Q-Qr3), 2013-14-(24Q-Qr4), 2014-15(24Q-Qr1), 2014-15(24Q-Q2),2014-15(24Q- Qr3), 2014-15(24Q-Qr4), 2015-16(24Q-Qr1),2015-16(24Q-Qr2),2015-16 (24Q-Qr3) & 2015-16(24Q-Qr4) Vs Income Tax Officer, Works Manager Govt. Central Automobile Workshop, Chennai , Tds Ward 3(3), No.1, Velachery Main Road, Velachery, Chennai. Chennai-600 042. Pan:Aaaga 1160N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals,…

WORKS MANAGER,GOVT. CENTRAL AUTOMOBILE WORKSHOP,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, TDS WARD - 3 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as

ITA 2434/CHNY/2019[2013-14 (24Q - Qtr. 4)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Oct 2020

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2432 To 2442/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14(24Q-Qr2), 2013-14(24Q-Qr3), 2013-14-(24Q-Qr4), 2014-15(24Q-Qr1), 2014-15(24Q-Q2),2014-15(24Q- Qr3), 2014-15(24Q-Qr4), 2015-16(24Q-Qr1),2015-16(24Q-Qr2),2015-16 (24Q-Qr3) & 2015-16(24Q-Qr4) Vs Income Tax Officer, Works Manager Govt. Central Automobile Workshop, Chennai , Tds Ward 3(3), No.1, Velachery Main Road, Velachery, Chennai. Chennai-600 042. Pan:Aaaga 1160N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals,…

WORKS MANAGER,GOVT. CENTRAL AUTOMOBILE WORKSHOP,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, TDS WARD - 3 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as

ITA 2433/CHNY/2019[2013-14 (24Q - Qtr. 3)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Oct 2020

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2432 To 2442/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14(24Q-Qr2), 2013-14(24Q-Qr3), 2013-14-(24Q-Qr4), 2014-15(24Q-Qr1), 2014-15(24Q-Q2),2014-15(24Q- Qr3), 2014-15(24Q-Qr4), 2015-16(24Q-Qr1),2015-16(24Q-Qr2),2015-16 (24Q-Qr3) & 2015-16(24Q-Qr4) Vs Income Tax Officer, Works Manager Govt. Central Automobile Workshop, Chennai , Tds Ward 3(3), No.1, Velachery Main Road, Velachery, Chennai. Chennai-600 042. Pan:Aaaga 1160N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

…e reasons for not filing appeals within time, the delay cannot be condoned merely on the ground the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. While doing so, he relied on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. DCIT (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 51(Mum). Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard learned counsels for both sides and perused material available on record along with the order of learned CIT(A). We find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals,…