How many judgments cite Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. CIT?

241 judgments on BharatTax cite Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. CIT (93 Taxmann.com 250), spanning 2018 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 274, Section 271(1)(c), Section 143(3), Section 132, Section 153A, Section 139(1).

Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. CIT

93 Taxmann.com 250High Court2018#362 most cited

What is Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

A penalty notice issued under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) is not invalid merely because it fails to strike off the irrelevant limb (concealment or inaccurate particulars) or specify the exact charge. Such a notice remains valid if the assessee understood the charge, was given adequate opportunity to respond, and failed to demonstrate any prejudice.

241

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. CIT · Section 274 · Section 271(1)(c) · penalty notice validity · non-striking off limbs · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · no prejudice · Section 292B · Madras High Court

Also reported as

403 ITR 407

Sections most often in play

Section 274 Section 271(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 132 Section 153A Section 139(1)Section 14A Section 270A

Issues it is cited on

section 274(1)section 43b(f)section 2(45)section 36(l)(iii)section 211 section 271(l)section 32(1)(iia)house property income section 140 section 271(l)(c)full and true disclosure furnishing inaccurate particulars of income

Judgments citing Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. CIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE vs. SRI MAHESWARY GRANITES (P) LTD, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3054/CHNY/2025[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3054/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2015-16 The Asst. Commissioner Of Sri Maheswary Granites (P) Income Tax, Vs. Ltd., Central Circle – 2, Old No.115, New No.84, Coimbatore Bashyakarlu Road West, R.S.Puram, Coimbatore Pan: Aafcs 9118K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. V. Aswathy, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.M.C.R. Mohan, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.02.2026

For Appellant: Ms. V. Aswathy, JCITFor Respondent: Shri K.M.C.R. Mohan, Advocate

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज" के, उपा"य" एवं "ी इंटूर" रामा राव, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 3054/CHNY/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2015-16 The Asst. Commissioner of Sri Maheswary Granites (P) Income Tax, Vs. Ltd., Central Circle – 2, Old No.115, New No.84, Coimbatore Bashyakarlu Road West, R.S.Puram, Coimbatore PAN: AAFCS 9118K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Ms. V. Aswathy, JCIT ""यथ" क" ओ…

M/S. R R INDUSTRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

ITA 2743/CHNY/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy. Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2741 To 2743/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11 M/S. Rr Industries Ltd., No.94/95, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. [Pan: Aaacr 3594 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 Dcit, Central Circle-1(4), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Mr.M.K. Rangaswamy, Ca : Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.Cit : 11.02.2026 : 18.02.2026 आदेश / Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (Hereinafter In Short 'The Ld.Cit(A)'), Chennai-18, Dated 07.08.2025, For The Assessment Year (Hereinafter In Short 'Ay') 2008-09 To 2010-11 Confirming The Penalty- Imposed U/S.271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act'). :: 2 ::

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…e case of Babuji Jacob v. ITO reported in [2021] 430 ITR 259 (Mad.)(HC) was passed after 08.12.2020 and by the very same Judge, Hon'ble Justice T.S. Shivagnanam, who had taken note of the decision in the case of Sundaram Finance Ltd v. ACIT reported in [2018] 403 ITR 407 which was challenged by Sundaram Finance before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing SLP which was dismissed and reported in [2018] 99 taxmann.com 152 (SC). Having considered all the contentions of the Revenue and after considering a host of decision, their Lordships was pleased to hold in the case of Babuji Jacob (supra) that the notice initiatin…

M/S. R R INDUSTRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

ITA 2742/CHNY/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy. Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2741 To 2743/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11 M/S. Rr Industries Ltd., No.94/95, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. [Pan: Aaacr 3594 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 Dcit, Central Circle-1(4), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Mr.M.K. Rangaswamy, Ca : Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.Cit : 11.02.2026 : 18.02.2026 आदेश / Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (Hereinafter In Short `The Ld.Cit(A)'), Chennai-18, Dated 07.08.2025, For The Assessment Year (Hereinafter In Short `Ay') 2008-09 To 2010-11 Confirming The Penalty- Imposed U/S.271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act'). :: 2 ::

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 153CSection 2Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

M/S. R R INDUSTRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2741/CHNY/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy. S

For Appellant: Mr.M.K. Rangaswamy, CAFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…case of Babuji Jacob v. ITO reported in [2021] 430 ITR 259 (Mad.)(HC) was passed after 08.12.2020 and by the very same Judge, Hon’ble Justice T.S. Shivagnanam, who had taken note of the decision in the case of Sundaram Finance Ltd v. ACIT reported in [2018] 403 ITR 407 which was challenged by Sundaram Finance before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing SLP which was dismissed and reported in [2018] 99 taxmann.com 152 (SC). Having considered all the contentions of the Revenue and after considering a host of decision, their Lordships was pleased to hold in the case of Babuji Jacob (supra) that the notice initiat…

EMPOWER INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD-1(1)(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4904/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt.Renu Jauhri7 (A.Y.2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Mangla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra- CIT DR

Section 133ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

…s never under any doubt as to the charge it had to meet: No prejudice has been demonstrated to AO or CIT(A) to have been caused to the appellant due to the format of the notice. The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Sundaram Finance Ltd. vs. CIT (2018) 403 ITR 407, the SLP against which was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, has held that non-striking off of the irrelevant limb in the notice would not by itself, vitiate the penalty proceedings, especially, when the assessee has understood the charge and has been given adequate opportunity to respond. The AO in the penalty order has correctly pointed o…

N. VIJAY KUMAR, ACIT, CHENNAI vs. RAJAH MUTHIAH CHETTIAR CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue & CO of assessee are

ITA 2097/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr. Arjunraj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Saujanya Ranjan, IRS

Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 9

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी अिमताभ शु"ा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2097 & 2098/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21 & Cross-Objection Nos.73 & 74/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21 v. The ACIT, Rajah Muthiah Chettiar Central Circle-3(2), Charitable & Chennai. Educational Trust, 603, Chettinad Towers, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 006. [PAN: AAATR 3208 F] (अपीलाथ"/A…

ACIT-19(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MANOHAR KANUNGO, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross

ITA 685/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudhary: A.Y. : 2009-10 C.O. No. 75/Mum/2025 : A.Y. : 2009-10 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 685/M/25)

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…fying the specific charge is a mere technicality and the same cannot be basis to hold the whole penalty proceedings as vitiated in law. The Ld.DR drawn our reference to the decision of the Hon‟ble Madras High Court in the case of Sundaram Finance Ltd., [2018] 403 ITR 407 (Madras). 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The primary contention of the assessee is that the notice issued u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act suffer from a fundamental defect in as much as the AO failed to specify the particular charge - whether the penalty proceedings were initiated for "con…

M.LAKHAMSI& CO. ,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 17(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4304/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: \nMr. Ketan Vajani, CAFor Respondent: \nShri Annavaran Kasuri, (Sr. AR)

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 292B

…\nthe Act comes to the rescue of the revenue in such a case as in substance\nand effect the notice was in conformity with the intent and purpose of\nthe act.He also placed reliance on hon'ble Madras High Court held in\nthe case of Sundaram Finance Ltd. (2018) 403 ITR 407 (Madras)inter\nalia held that” if the case of the assessee is that they have been put to\nprejudice and principles of natural justice were violated on account of\nnot being able to submit an effective reply, it would be a different\nmatter. This was never the plea of the assessee either before the\nAssessing Officer or before the first Appellate…

MUKON CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 7(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1152/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: \nShri Siddharth Srivashtav,ARFor Respondent: \nShri Annavaran Kasuri, (Sr. AR)

Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 292B

…nthe Act comes to the rescue of the revenue in such a case as in substance\nand effect the notice was in conformity with the intent and purpose of\nthe act. He also placed reliance on hon'ble Madras High Court held in\nthe case of Sundaram Finance Ltd. (2018) 403 ITR 407 (Madras)inter\nalia held that” if the case of the assessee is that they have been put to\nprejudice and principles of natural justice were violated on account of\nnot being able to submit an effective reply, it would be a different\nmatter. This was never the plea of the assessee either before the\nAssessing Officer or before the first Appellate…

DIALNET COMMUNICATIONS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 7(3), NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7885/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shuklaassessment Year: 2015-16 Dial Net Communications Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, C-31, Ground Floor, Greater Ward-7(3), New Delhi. Kailash, Part-I, Delhi-110048. Pan: Aabcd 5472 D Appellant Respondent

Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…Hon’ble Supreme Court which is reported at 130 Taxmann.com 379. The Ld. Sr. DR, has similarly relied on decision of High Court of Madras in M/s. Gangotri Textiles Ltd vs DCIT (121 Taxmann.com 171) as well as another decision in Sundaram Finance Ltd. Vs ACIT (93 Taxmann.com 250) against which the assessee’s SLP has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court which is reported at 99 Taxmann.com 152. 8. Upon perusal of notice issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) as extracted above, we find that though the applicable clause has been ticked by Ld. AO, however, the applicable limb i.e., whether the penalty was being in…

ARUSUVAI FOOD PROCESSORS PVT. LTD.,SALEM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), SALEM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 416/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.D. Anand, Advocate

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 264Section 270ASection 270A(1)Section 270A(9)(a)Section 270A(9)(c)Section 271Section 41(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.416/Chny/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 v. M/s. Arusuvai Food – The DCIT, Processors Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1(1), No.352, Sooramangalam Main Road, Salem. Manipuram, Salem-636 009. [PAN: AAHCA 6759 L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.D. Anand, Advocate : ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by Mr.M. Mohan Babu, Ad…

GAURAV AJMERA,RATLAM vs. DCIT(CENTRAL)-2, INDORE

Accordingly, Ground No.2 raised by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 808/IND/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 115BSection 131Section 132(4)Section 132ASection 143(3)Section 234ASection 271ASection 274

…Gaurav Ajmera ITA No. 808/Ind/2024 – AY 2017-18 1 अपीलीय अधिकरण, इन्दौर न्यायपीठ, इन्दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 808/Ind/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Gaurav Ajmera 38, Ram Mohalla, Ratlam (Appellant / Assessee) DCIT (Central)-2 Indore (Respondent /Revenue ) बनाम/ Vs. P.A. No. AGLPA8863C Assessee by | Shri Pawan Ved, AR Revenue by | Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 07.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 25.08.2025 आदेश/ORDER Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by orde…

R V R NAGESH LEGAL HEIR OF LATE VENGATTARAYALU RAJAN,KANCHIPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORP WARD - 22(4), TAMBARAM, TAMBARAM

ITA 789/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.789/Chny/2025

Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…against which revenue's Special Leave petition (SLP) has already been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court which is reported at 130 Taxmann.com 379. The Ld. Sr. DR, has similarly relied on decision of High Court of Madras in M/s. Sundaram Finance Ltd. Vs ACIT (93 Taxmann.com 250) against which the assessee's SLP has already been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court which is reported at 99 Taxmann.com 152. 8. Upon perusal of notice issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) as extracted above, we find that though the applicable clause has been ticked by Ld. AO, however, the applicable limb i.e., whether the penalty was being i…

KAWARILAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2832/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 132Section 153CSection 270A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2831 & 2832/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 v. Kawarilal, The ACIT, No.56, Ammayappa Mudali Street, Central Circle-1(2), Royapettah, Chennai. Chennai-600 034. [PAN: ALSPK 7370 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Mr.G. Baskar, Advocate : ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent…

KAWARILAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CRICLE-1(2) CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2831/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 132Section 153CSection 270A

PRAKASHCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC2(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 68/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.68/Chny/2024 िनधा रण वष /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Prakashchand Jain, The Dy. Commissioner Of V. 39 & 40 Bakers Street, Income Tax, Choolai, Chennai – 600 112. Central Circle-2(3), Chennai. [Pan: Ahhpp 1690D] (अपीलाथ$/Appellant) (%&थ$/Respondent) अपीलाथ$कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate %&थ$कीओरसे /Respondent By Shri R. Clement Ramesh : Kumar, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.12.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 07.03.2025 :

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate

Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 270A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ाय पीठ,चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.68/Chny/2024 िनधा रण वष /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Prakashchand Jain, The Dy. Commissioner of v. 39 and 40 Bakers Street, Income Tax, Choolai, Chennai – 600 112. Central Circle-2(3), Chennai. [PAN: AHHPP 1690D] (अपीलाथ$/Appellant) (%&थ$/Respondent) अपीलाथ$कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate %&थ$कीओरसे /Respondent by Shri R. Clement Ramesh :…

SMS CONCAST AG,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3(1)(2) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1444/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Abhishek Deval, Sr. DR

Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80GSection 80HSection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘I’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No:-1444/Del/2019 (Assessment Year- 1999-2000) LT Foods Unit 134, 1st Floor, Addl. CIT Special Rectangle, Saket Distt. Vs. Range-5 Centre, New Delhi-110017 New Delhi PAN No:AAACL0259K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by: Sh. Rohit Jain, Advocate Sh. Shivam Gupta, AR Respondent by : Sh. Abhishek Deval, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 28.05.2025 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JM The appeal by assessee is preferred against the order of Commissio…

JAYASAKTHI KNIT WEAR,TIRUPPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), TIRUPPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1758/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1758/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Jayasakthi Knit Wear, The Ito, 3/95, Thanneerpandal Colony, Ward-1(4), Cheyur Road, Tirupur. Karukkampalayam B.O. Avinashi, Tirupur-641 654. [Pan: Aaffj 4343 J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam

Section 270ASection 270A(9)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी अिमताभ शु"ा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1758/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 v. Jayasakthi Knit Wear, The ITO, 3/95, Thanneerpandal Colony, Ward-1(4), Cheyur Road, Tirupur. Karukkampalayam B.O. Avinashi, Tirupur-641 654. [PAN: AAFFJ 4343 J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respo…

MELAKANDY PUTHALATH FAROOK,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1890/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1890/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Melekandy Puthalath Farook Acit बनाम/ Faraz No.9 Sbi Colony, Corporate Circle-2(1) Vs. Sastri Nagar, Adyar, Chennai-600 020. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaapf-2644-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D. Anand (Advocate) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit) -Ld. Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT) -Ld. Sr. DR

Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 270A(9)(a)Section 274

…1 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “सी” "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ'वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम)। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.1890/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Melekandy Puthalath Farook ACIT बनाम/ Faraz No.9 SBI Colony, Corporate Circle-2(1) Vs. Sastri Nagar, Adyar, Chennai-600 020. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAAPF-2644-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri D. Anand (Advocate)…

KOTHARI JEWELS PRIVATE LIMIED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal, file filed by the assessee stands party allowed with no order as to cost

ITA 964/JPR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary,JCIT-DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…1 KOTHARI JEWELS PVT LTD. VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, ‘’SMC” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 964/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/s. Kothari Jewels (P) Ltd. cuke The ACIT 5th Floor, KGK Towers, Dutta Pada Road Vs. Central Circle-2 Near Ekta Bhoomi Garden, Borivali (East), Jaipur Mumbai LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCA 2717 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@As…

Showing 1–20 of 241 · Page 1 of 13

...