Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala

Dinesh Kumar and Sons, Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer Non-Corporate Ward 5(1), Chennai

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2511/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Dinesh Kumar & Sons The Income Tax Officer, (Huf), Vs. Non-Corporate Ward 5(1), No.41, M.S.Koil Street, Chennai. Royapuram, Chennai – 600 013. Pan: Aamhr 9861G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Hitesh, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.11.2025

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarized the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Sowmya Kannan, Chennai vs. ITO, Ward-19(4), Chennai

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2524/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ms. Sowmya Kannan, The Income Tax Officer, No.634-A, Ramasamy Salai, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward 19(4), K K Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 078. Pan: Aaopk 5170F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Abhishek Murali, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2025

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarized the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Arulmigu Vaikunda Perumal and Embarswamy Devasthanam, Kanchipuram vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward-2, Chennai

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2525/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Arulmiguvaikunda The Income Tax Officer, Perumal & Embarswamy Vs. Exemptions Ward 2, Devasthanam, Chennai. No.01, Sunguvachatram, Sungavachatram S.O, Sriperumbudur, Kanchipuram – 602 105. Pan: Aafta 4259C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2025

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarized the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Sri Muthu Agencies, Puducherry vs. ITO, Ward-3, Puducherry

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2507/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Sri Muthu Agencies, The Income Tax Officer, No.9, 3Rd Cross, Vs. Ward 3, Sri Ramnagar, Puducherry Achariyapuram, Villianur, Puducherry – 605 110. Pan: Achfs 9277N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2025

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarized the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Sujatha Hariharan, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-3(3), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2490 & 2491/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Smt. Sujatha Hariharan, Old No.20, New No.8, Poes Road, 2Nd Street, Teynampet, Chennai - 600 018. The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward 3(3), Chennai. Pan: Bgcps 5734A (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Fca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2025 आदेश/Order Per George George K: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Two Different Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Both Dated 24.07.2025, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called 'The Act'). The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2015-16.

…e Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarized the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Sujatha Hariharan, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-3(3), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2490 & 2491/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Smt. Sujatha Hariharan, Old No.20, New No.8, Poes Road, 2Nd Street, Teynampet, Chennai - 600 018. Pan: Bgcps 5734A (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward 3(3), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Y. Sridhar, Fca : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2025 आदेश/Order Per George George K: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Two Different Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Both Dated 24.07.2025, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called 'The Act'). The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2015-16.

…e Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarized the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Trd 309 Pallinatham Mpcs, Trichy vs. Assessing Officer, Ward 2(1) Trichy, Trichy

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2482/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Trd 309 Pallinatham The Income Tax Officer, Mpcs, Vs. Ward 2(1), Pallinatham Valavanthi Post, Trichy Musiri Tk, Tiruchirappalli – 621 211. Pan: Aafat 2275G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri V. Alagappan, Ca (Through Virtual Mode) ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2025

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarized the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Narayanan Varalakshmi, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw-1(5), Madurai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 16. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by…

Prabu Karuppaiah, Pudukkottai vs. ITO, Ward-1, Pudukkottai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2492, 2493 & 2494/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Prabu Karuppaiah, The Income Tax Officer, 8/115, Avudaiyarkoil Poovalur Vs. Ward 1, Bo, Pudukkottai Avadaiyar Kovil, Pudukkottai – 614 618. Pan: Clepp 3346R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarized the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Prabu Karuppaiah, Pudukkottai vs. ITO, Ward-1, Pudukkottai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2492, 2493 & 2494/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Prabu Karuppaiah, The Income Tax Officer, 8/115, Avudaiyarkoil Poovalur Vs. Ward 1, Bo, Pudukkottai Avadaiyar Kovil, Pudukkottai – 614 618. Pan: Clepp 3346R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarized the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Prabhu Karuppaiah, Pudukkottai vs. ITO, Ward-1, Pudukkottai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2492, 2493 & 2494/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Prabu Karuppaiah, The Income Tax Officer, 8/115, Avudaiyarkoil Poovalur Vs. Ward 1, Bo, Pudukkottai Avadaiyar Kovil, Pudukkottai – 614 618. Pan: Clepp 3346R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarized the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Aravindhan Bharathi, Tiruchirappalli vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Trichy

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

…hnologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. :-7-: ITA. No:2014 /Chny/2025 15. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by…

Mavilai Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd Kv 92, Kanyakumari vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward 1, Nagercoil

…e Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 16. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Manikandan, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-8(2), Chennai

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

Bench: Shri George George K

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarized the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…