← All Phrases

“stay petition”

AppealsSection 254Section 254340 judgments

The decision most relied on for stay petition is Allahabad in Dr. V.S. Chauhan v. Director of Income-tax, Investigations (336 ITR 533), cited in 21 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on stay petition

Allahabad in Dr. V.S. Chauhan v. Director of Income-tax, Investigations
336 ITR 533 · 2011 · High Court
21
citing judgments

A writ petition challenging a search operation is liable to be dismissed on the ground of laches if the assessee unduly delays challenging the proceedings and only seeks to stall them when they anticipate an adverse outcome.

KishoreJagjivandasTanna v. Joint Director of Income Tax (Inv.)
98 Taxmann.com 235 · 2018 · High Court
11
citing judgments

A litigant who delays in pursuing their rights for over a decade, despite a favorable court order, does not deserve relief in discretionary and equitable jurisdiction.

Judgments citing stay petition

M.P Manoharan, Kannur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Kannur

In the result, the appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes and stay application is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 716/COCH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm & Sa No. 186/Coch/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 M.P. Manoharan .......... Appellant Vinayasree, Keezhur P.O., Iritty Kannur 670703 [Pan: Adgpm2741P] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward - 3, Kannur Appellant By: Shri Arun Raj S., Advocate Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 03.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing the assessee. 8. Since the appeal is disposed of, the stay petition filed by the assessee becomes infructuous. 9. In the result, the appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes and stay application is dismissed as infructuous

Karnam Rudrapillai Gunaseharan, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Corp. Ward-4, Coimbator

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the stay petition filed by the assessee is dismissed as academic

ITA 45/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 45/Chny/2025 & Sp No: 16/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Karnam Rudrapillai Gunaseharan, Income Tax Officer, 112, Mayflower Sakthi Garden, V. Corporate Ward -4, Nanjundapuram South, Coimbatore. Coimbatore South – 641 036. [Pan: Agxpg-7863-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Arul Manian, Ca & Shri. Murugappa Boopathy, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Arul Manian, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 69

order of the Ld.CIT(A) and allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee. 13. As, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, stay petition filed by the assessee becomes academic. 14. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the stay petition filed

A& A International Trading Pvt. Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp. Circle 1(1), Chennai

In the result, the corresponding grounds raised by the revenue stand dismissed…

ITA 2231/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2231/Chny/2024, निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2016-17 A & A International Trading Pvt Ltd, The Asst. Commissioner Of Income No.6-5/140, Kaviarasu Kannadasan Tax, Nagar, Kodungaiyur, Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai-600 118. Chennai. [Pan: Aaica0039J] आयकर अपील सं./Sa No.15/Chny/2025 (Ita No.2231/Chny/2024) निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2016-17 (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri D.Anand, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.Sasikumar, Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.02.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M : These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Bearing Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1065907633(1) Dated 21.06.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax [Herein After “Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[Nfac], Delhi, For The Assessment Years 2016-17 & Stay Petition No.15/Chny/2025 Arising Out Of Ita No.2231/Chny/2024 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. Page - 1 - Of 8

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.Sasikumar, CIT
Section 250Section 41(1)

Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2016-17 and Stay Petition No.15/Chny/2025 arising out of ITA No.2231/Chny/2024 for the assessment year 2016-17. Page - 1 - of 8 ITA-2231/Chny/2024 & SA-15 /Chny/2025 Through the aforesaid appeals

Pollangi Chinnappan Chittybabu, Ambur, Vellore, Tamilnadu vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Vellore

In the result, the appeals raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1776/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1776/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2017-18 Pollangi Chinnappan Chittybabu, Income Tax Officer, No.3/97, Thattaparai Village, Ward-3, Kadavalam Post, Vellore. Thuthipet Via Ambur, Vellore Dist, Tamil Nadu-635811 [Pan: Ahjpc3990P] आयकर अपील सं./Sa No.34/Chny/2024 (Ita No.1776/Chny/2024) निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2017-18 (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri A.S.Harihara Kumar, C.A. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Keerthi Narayanan, Jcit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.12.2024 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri A.S.Harihara Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Keerthi Narayanan, JCIT
Section 250Section 69

Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2017-18 and Stay Petition No.34/Chny/2024 arising out of ITA No.1776/Chny/2024 for the assessment year 2017-18. ITA No.1776 & SA-34/Chny/2024 :- 2 -: Through the aforesaid appeals the assesse has challenged ... No.34/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2017-18 4.0 As the main appeal of the assessee raised vide ITA No.1776/ Chny/2024 stands disposed as above, the present stay petition No.34/Chny/2024 moved by the assessee has become infructuous and hence dismissed. 5.0. In the result, the appeals raised by the assessee are allowed

The Nemmara Co Op Urban Bank Ltd, Palakkad vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Palakkad

In the result, the appeals as well as the stay petitions filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 602/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Amaljith, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR

Date of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 Date of Hearing : 08.01.2024 O R D E R Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM : These appeals and as many as stay petitions are arising from the orders of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and it relates to the assessment years ... VSVS, then the assessee may request the Tribunal for reinstatement of its appeal in accordance with law. Since the appeals are disposed of, the stay petitions become infructuous and accordingly dismissed. 5. Further, there was delay of 77 days in filing these appeals before the Tribunal. Since the assessee

The Nemmara Co Op Urban Bank Ltd, Palakkad vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Palakkad

In the result, the appeals as well as the stay petitions filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 601/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Amaljith, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR

Date of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 Date of Hearing : 08.01.2024 O R D E R Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM : These appeals and as many as stay petitions are arising from the orders of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and it relates to the assessment years ... VSVS, then the assessee may request the Tribunal for reinstatement of its appeal in accordance with law. Since the appeals are disposed of, the stay petitions become infructuous and accordingly dismissed. 5. Further, there was delay of 77 days in filing these appeals before the Tribunal. Since the assessee

The Nemmara Co Op Urban Bank, Palakkad vs. ITO Ward 5, Palakkad

In the result, the appeals as well as the stay petitions filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 600/COCH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Amaljith, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR

Date of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 Date of Hearing : 08.01.2024 O R D E R Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM : These appeals and as many as stay petitions are arising from the orders of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and it relates to the assessment years ... VSVS, then the assessee may request the Tribunal for reinstatement of its appeal in accordance with law. Since the appeals are disposed of, the stay petitions become infructuous and accordingly dismissed. 5. Further, there was delay of 77 days in filing these appeals before the Tribunal. Since the assessee

DCIT Central Circle 1(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad vs. Pinac Stock Brokers Private Limited, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 858/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumar & Shri T.R Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri R N Dsouza, CIT.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 275Section 68

duly followed the Co-ordinate Bench order of this Tribunal. As rightly pointed out by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, there is no Stay Petition filed by the Revenue before the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat to stay the operation of the quantum order passed by this Tribunal

M/S Ayodhya Development Authority (Formely Ayodhya Faizabad Development Authority), Lucknow vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

ITA 145/LKW/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jan 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. & Sh Mradul AgarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ghiyasuddin CIT(DR) & Sh.Mazahar Akram, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 58

appeal or raise any new ground of appeal during the pendency of appeal.” 3. In addition to these appeals, the assessee also filed stay petitions for the assessment years 2012-13, 2014-15 and 2015-16. As the issues involved in all these appeals are common and the stay petitions

M/S Ayodhya Development Authority(Formerly Ayodhya Faizabad Development Authority), Ayodhya vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

ITA 143/LKW/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jan 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. & Sh Mradul AgarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ghiyasuddin CIT(DR) & Sh.Mazahar Akram, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 58

appeal or raise any new ground of appeal during the pendency of appeal.” 3. In addition to these appeals, the assessee also filed stay petitions for the assessment years 2012-13, 2014-15 and 2015-16. As the issues involved in all these appeals are common and the stay petitions

M/S Ayodhya Faizabad Developement Authority, Faizabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

ITA 520/LKW/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. & Sh Mradul AgarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ghiyasuddin CIT(DR) & Sh.Mazahar Akram, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 58

appeal or raise any new ground of appeal during the pendency of appeal.” 3. In addition to these appeals, the assessee also filed stay petitions for the assessment years 2012-13, 2014-15 and 2015-16. As the issues involved in all these appeals are common and the 11 stay

M/S Ayodhya Faizabad Developement Authority, Faizabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

ITA 518/LKW/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. & Sh Mradul AgarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ghiyasuddin CIT(DR) & Sh.Mazahar Akram, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 58

appeal or raise any new ground of appeal during the pendency of appeal.” 3. In addition to these appeals, the assessee also filed stay petitions for the assessment years 2012-13, 2014-15 and 2015-16. As the issues involved in all these appeals are common and the 13 stay

Nga Hr (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit (Jao - DCIT, Circle 7(1)(1), Mumbai)

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed and the stay petition filed by the assessee stands dismissed infructuous

ITA 5777/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 153(1)Section 153(4)Section 253(1)(d)Section 92(3)Section 92C

Accordingly grounds 3(a)-(f) raised by the assessee stands allowed. 8. As we have already decided the merits by deleting the addition the stay petition filed by the assessee becomes infructuous. S.A. No.122/Mum/2024 A.Y. 2021-22 12 Accordingly, the Stay Petition filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous ... result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed and the stay petition filed by the assessee stands dismissed infructuous. Order pronounced in the open court on 31/01/2025 (OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA) Judicial Member Mumbai: Dated: 31/01/2025 Poonam Mirashi, Stenographer Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant

Income Tax Officer, Kautaliya Bhavan, Bkc vs. Rajnish Bharti HUF, Darukhana

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4378/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mr. C.V. JainFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

know whether any such application has been filed by the assessee, but it is clear that no stay petition of assessee was listed before us and therefore, this ground of appeal is dismissed as infructuous. The ground No. 7 (ii) and 7(iii) stands already covered while disposing the grounds

Income Tax Officer 41(3)(3), Bkc vs. Rajnish Bharti HUF, Darukhana

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4377/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mr. C.V. JainFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

know whether any such application has been filed by the assessee, but it is clear that no stay petition of assessee was listed before us and therefore, this ground of appeal is dismissed as infructuous. The ground No. 7 (ii) and 7(iii) stands already covered while disposing the grounds

Cognizant Technology Solutions India Private Limited, Chennai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle 1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the Stay Applications filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2215/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2201 & 2202, 2203 & 2204, 2205, 2209, 2211 & 2212, 2213 & 2214 & 2215/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2020-21, 2021-22, 2015- 16, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & S.A. Nos. 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74 & 75/Chny/2024 [In I.T.A. Nos.2201, 2202, 2203, 2204, 2205, 2209, 2211, 2212, 2213, 2214 & 2215/Chny/2024] Cognizant Technology Solutions India Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, No. 5/535, Okkiyam Income Tax, Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Circle 1(1), Road, Chennai 600 097. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacd3312M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Murugesan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27.11.2024 & 03.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Eleven Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate, But, Identical Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai For The Assessment Years Mentioned Hereinabove. Out Of The Above Appeals, The Appeals In Ita Nos. 2201/Chny/2024, 2203/Chny/2024, 2205/Chny/2024, 2209/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. Murugesan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)

75/Chny/2024 24. Since we have adjudicated the main appeals and partly allowed the appeals of the assessee, the stay petitions filed by the assessee become infructuous and accordingly, all the stay applications filed by the assessee stands closed. 25. In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee

Cognizant Technology Solutions India Private Limited, Chennai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation 1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the Stay Applications filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2214/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2201 & 2202, 2203 & 2204, 2205, 2209, 2211 & 2212, 2213 & 2214 & 2215/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2020-21, 2021-22, 2015- 16, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & S.A. Nos. 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74 & 75/Chny/2024 [In I.T.A. Nos.2201, 2202, 2203, 2204, 2205, 2209, 2211, 2212, 2213, 2214 & 2215/Chny/2024] Cognizant Technology Solutions India Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, No. 5/535, Okkiyam Income Tax, Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Circle 1(1), Road, Chennai 600 097. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacd3312M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Murugesan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27.11.2024 & 03.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Eleven Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate, But, Identical Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai For The Assessment Years Mentioned Hereinabove. Out Of The Above Appeals, The Appeals In Ita Nos. 2201/Chny/2024, 2203/Chny/2024, 2205/Chny/2024, 2209/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. Murugesan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)

75/Chny/2024 24. Since we have adjudicated the main appeals and partly allowed the appeals of the assessee, the stay petitions filed by the assessee become infructuous and accordingly, all the stay applications filed by the assessee stands closed. 25. In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee

Cognizant Technology Solutions India Private Limited, Chennai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle 1(1), Chennai

ITA 2213/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. Murugesan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'ए' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, CHEΝΝΑΙ श्री एस.एस. विश्वनेत्र रवि

Cognizant Technology Solutions India Private Limited, Chennai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation 1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the Stay Applications filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2212/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2201 & 2202, 2203 & 2204, 2205, 2209, 2211 & 2212, 2213 & 2214 & 2215/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2020-21, 2021-22, 2015- 16, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & S.A. Nos. 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74 & 75/Chny/2024 [In I.T.A. Nos.2201, 2202, 2203, 2204, 2205, 2209, 2211, 2212, 2213, 2214 & 2215/Chny/2024] Cognizant Technology Solutions India Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, No. 5/535, Okkiyam Income Tax, Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Circle 1(1), Road, Chennai 600 097. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacd3312M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Murugesan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27.11.2024 & 03.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Eleven Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate, But, Identical Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai For The Assessment Years Mentioned Hereinabove. Out Of The Above Appeals, The Appeals In Ita Nos. 2201/Chny/2024, 2203/Chny/2024, 2205/Chny/2024, 2209/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. Murugesan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)

75/Chny/2024 24. Since we have adjudicated the main appeals and partly allowed the appeals of the assessee, the stay petitions filed by the assessee become infructuous and accordingly, all the stay applications filed by the assessee stands closed. 25. In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee

Cognizant Technology Solutions India Private Limited, Chennai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle 1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the Stay Applications filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2211/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2201 & 2202, 2203 & 2204, 2205, 2209, 2211 & 2212, 2213 & 2214 & 2215/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2020-21, 2021-22, 2015- 16, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & S.A. Nos. 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74 & 75/Chny/2024 [In I.T.A. Nos.2201, 2202, 2203, 2204, 2205, 2209, 2211, 2212, 2213, 2214 & 2215/Chny/2024] Cognizant Technology Solutions India Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, No. 5/535, Okkiyam Income Tax, Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Circle 1(1), Road, Chennai 600 097. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacd3312M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Murugesan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27.11.2024 & 03.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Eleven Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate, But, Identical Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai For The Assessment Years Mentioned Hereinabove. Out Of The Above Appeals, The Appeals In Ita Nos. 2201/Chny/2024, 2203/Chny/2024, 2205/Chny/2024, 2209/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. Murugesan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)

75/Chny/2024 24. Since we have adjudicated the main appeals and partly allowed the appeals of the assessee, the stay petitions filed by the assessee become infructuous and accordingly, all the stay applications filed by the assessee stands closed. 25. In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee