K. BASKAR,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

RAMASAMY PALANISAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

K. BASKAR,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

RAMASAMY PALANISAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

M. VELUSAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

P. NALLUSAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

K. PARAMASIVAM,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

M. NATESAN,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

K. SADASIVAM,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

K. KATHIRVEL,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

R.EASWARAMOORTHY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

S. ARAVIND,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

S. EASWARAMOORTHY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

P. KARUNANITHI,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

M. VELUSAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

M.P. SANTHOSH KUMAR, ITO, CHENNAI vs. GREENPEACE ENVIRONMENT TRUST, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 406/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Greenpeace Environment Trust, Exemptions, Ward-1, Vs. New No.49, Old No.23, Chennai. Ellaiamman Colony, Gopalapuram, Chennai-600 086. [Pan:Aaatg-3538-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. Kumar Chandan, Jcit. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Y.Sridhar, F.C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am :

Charitable Trusts: The AO in his assessment order u/s.143(3) dated 31.03.2014 has invoked section 13(3)(cc) and section 13(3)(e) to disallow air travel expenses of Rs.91,37,031/- and per diem and subsistence of Rs.1,44,186/-. The sections have been invoked on the ground that the expenses have been incurred on the employees of Greenpeace

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RESEARCH ORGANISATIONS ,CHENNAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3197/Chny/2018 M/S. Environmental & Social Commissioner Of Income Tax Research Organisation, V. (Exemptions), No. 52A/1, Oragadam Road, Ayakar Bhavan, Ambattur, Iii Floor, 121 Mg Road, Chennai – 600 053. Nungambakkam, Chennai. [Pan: Aaaae 6275E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. V. Swaminathan, Ca : Shri. S. Palani Kumar, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.12.2021

dividend to its members and also company once registered cannot be irrevocable and thus, if any ancillary objects are in the nature of commercial activities, but the main objects of the company are charitable in nature, and falls under preservation of environment and preservation of monuments or places or objects of artistic or historic interest as defined

PALANISAMY GOUNDER LOGANATHAN,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was conducted on 23.01.2013 and that, the AO was in possession of the relevant seized material basis which the reasons were recorded and impugned reopening was done

K. PARAMASIVAM,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, KARUR

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was conducted on 23.01.2013 and that, the AO was in possession of the relevant seized material basis which the reasons were recorded and impugned reopening was done