MADURAI AGRI BUSINESS INCUBATION FORUM ,COIMBATORE vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

5)(iii) of the Act, the CIT(Exemption) noted that the time limit prescribed therein is mandatory and the CIT(Exemption) has no power to condone the delay in filing application in Form No.10AB. He noted that in the present case, the date of commencement of its activities is 14.07.2017 and the date of filing of application in Form No.10AB

HARI FOUNDATION,COIMBATORE vs. DLC-CA-(211)(1), ACIT EXEMPTIONS, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.917/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 V. Hari Foundation, The Acit (Exemptions), 3-1, Indira Nagar, Coimbatore. Kuniamuthur S.O., Coimbatore-641 035. [Pan: Aabth 2056 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

139 and sub-section (5) provides mechanism to file a belated return, therefore, even if assessee files return before last date of filing of belated return same should be treated as due compliance to Section 12A(1)(ba) - Whether in view of said order of Tribunal, assessee was entitled for exemption under section 11-Held, yes [Paras 4 and 5

NEPHROLOGY ASSOCIATION,MADURAI vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD, MADURAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.793/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Nephrology Association, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 6/6-B2, Sivagangai Road, Exemption Ward, Madurai North, Madurai. Tamil Nadu 625 020. [Pan:Aaban7750J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Tarun, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Suresh Guduri, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.09.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.09.2023

139(1) of the Act, the Assessing Officer disallowed ₹.30,00,000/- of accumulation under section 11(2) of the Act. In the absence of condonation of delay in filing Form No. 10, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee made written submission for condoning the delay

SRINIVASA FASHINS PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD-6(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy)नधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Heard Through Video Conferencing V. M/S.Srinivasa Fashions Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.57G, Sidco Industrial Estate, Corporate Ward-6(4), Ambattur, Chennai. Chennai-600 098. [Pan: Aaics 9511 R] (अपीलाथ./Appellant) (/0यथ./Respondent) : अपीलाथ. क1 ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.N.Vijay Kumar, Ca : Mr.Ar.V.Sreenivasan, Jcit /0यथ. क1 ओर से /Respondent By : 28.09.2020 सुनवाई क1 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.09.2020 घोषणा क1 तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar:

5. Section 36 of the Act deals with certain deductions which shall be allowed in respect of matters dealt with therein, in computing the income referred to in section 28 of the Act. Different types of deductions are provided therein in various clauses of section 36. Clause (iv) of sub-section :- 18 -: (1) deals with deductions on account of contribution

F.V. 112 THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES COOP THRIFT AND CREDIT SOCIETY,VILLUPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VILLUPURAM

In the result the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2047/Chny/2025 िनधा8रण वष8 /Assessment Year: 2019-20 Fv 112 The Villupuram District Public The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Health Department Employees Co-Op. Ward-1, Thrift & Credit Society, 60, Vilupuram. Kandasamy Layout, 1St Street, (K.K. Road), Villupuram 605 602, Viluppuram [Pan: Aaaaf4857B]

139(1). Section 80AC was introduced to ensure timely compliance with tax filing obligations for claiming deductions under Chapter VI-A. The legislative intent behind this provision is to streamline tax administration by making it obligatory for taxpayers to file returns within the prescribed timeline to avail deductions. It applies to all deductions under Chapter VI-A, including section

THE ERODE CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION EMP CO-OP T& C LIMITED,ERODE vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), ERODE

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.509 & 510/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2020-2021)

section 139(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Circular No. 13/2023 allows condonation of delay for deduction u/s 80P 4) The CIT(A) failed to see that CBDT had issued a Circular No. 13/2023 dated 26.07.2023 allowing the co-operative societies to claim deduction u/s 80P by filing condonation of delay Petition u/s 119(2)(b) to treat

THE ERODE CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION EMP CO-OP T& C LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO, WARD 1 (1), ERODE

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.509 & 510/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2020-2021)

section 139(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Circular No. 13/2023 allows condonation of delay for deduction u/s 80P 4) The CIT(A) failed to see that CBDT had issued a Circular No. 13/2023 dated 26.07.2023 allowing the co-operative societies to claim deduction u/s 80P by filing condonation of delay Petition u/s 119(2)(b) to treat

SUMUNUM FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

5)(iii) of the Act, the CIT(Exemption) noted that the time limit prescribed therein is mandatory and the CIT(Exemption) has no power to condone the delay in filing application in Form No.10AB. He noted that in the present case, the date of commencement of its activities is 15.07.2019 and the date of filing of application in Form No.10AB

SUMUNUM FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS,CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

5)(iii) of the Act, the CIT(Exemption) noted that the time limit prescribed therein is mandatory and the CIT(Exemption) has no power to condone the delay in filing application in Form No.10AB. He noted that in the present case, the date of commencement of its activities is 15.07.2019 and the date of filing of application in Form No.10AB

D.A.V. EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-4,, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Street, Adambakkam, Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 4, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit 28.10.2025 21.01.2026 : प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : आदेश/Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Id. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The

condoned the said delay in filing Form 10A vide his order dated 30.11.2016 and referred to page 82 of the paper book. He vehemently argued that the Assessing Officer, considering all the details, accepted the returned income and formed an opinion that the assessee was eligible for claiming exemption under section 11 of the Act during scrutiny assessment. He further

TIRUPUR ARUNACHALA GOUNDER RADHAMBIKAI KUPPUSAMY,TIRUPUR vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.363/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) T A G Radhambikai Kuppusamy, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.5, Mp Nagar Extension, Che –C (68) (1) Suriya Prabha Garden, Chennai. Tirupur 641 607

delay initially along with Form 35, When in fact it was filed along with Form 35 and also repeatedly informed in response to all the notices citing the deficiency. [please see para 6.3 of the CIT(A) Order / pages 5 to 9] 4. The learned First Appellate Authority has erred in stating that the Assessee is a Habitual Defaulter (last

D.A.V. EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-2, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Exemption Ward 4, Street, Adambakkam, Chennai. Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

condoned the said delay in filing Form 10A vide his order dated 30.11.2016 and referred to page 82 of the paper book. He vehemently argued that the Assessing Officer, considering all the details, accepted the returned income and formed an opinion that the assessee was eligible for claiming exemption under section 11 of the Act during scrutiny assessment. He further

MANGAL TIRTH ESTATE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-4(1), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:30/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Mangal Tirth Estate Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 769, Spencer Plaza, Anna Salai, Vs. Corporate Ward- 4(1), Mount Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 002. [Pan:Aaacm-4614-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N. V. Balaji, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl. C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.05.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/ Jcit (A)-4, Hyderabad, For The Assessment Year 2020-21, Vide Order Dated 07.11.2024. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Company Filed Its Return Of Income For The A.Y.2020-21 On 17.11.2020 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.11,20,57,920/-. The Return Of Income Was Processed By The Ao, Cpc, Bangalore On 29.12.2021 & Raised A Demand Of Rs.93,79,350/- By Denying The Beneficial Tax Rate As Per Section 115Baa Of The Act & By Applying The Tax Rate Of 30%.

139 (5) of the Act (and the assessee could, in turn, avail the benefit of carry forward losses in the revised return of income). (ii) Secondly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Wipro Limited held that section 10B of the Act is an "exemption provision" and hence, assessee claiming such exemption has to be "strictly comply with

PALAM RURAL CENTRE,TIRUPPUR vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS,, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the Stay Application filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1560/Chny/2025 & S.A.No.51Chny/2025 [Arising In Ita No.: 1560/Chny/2025] िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2018-19 Palam Rural Centre, The Asst. Commissioner Of Pethampalayam, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions), Veerapandi S.O., Coimbatore. Tiruppur – 641 605. [Pan: Aaatp-2929-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Edser Raj, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, J.C.I.T.

section 139(5) on 23/09/2020 vide Ack. No.576055421230920. The said return of income also remains unanswered from the side of the Income Tax Department. 7. Later, aggrieved by the Intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act, the assessee filed an appeal before the ADDL/JCIT(A)-2, Vishakhapatnam belatedly stating that the delay in filing the appeal was not intentional or deliberate

JAGANNATHAN BASKAR,HOSUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, , HOSUR

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2629/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-2018) Jagannathan Baskar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, H88, New Astc Hudco, Ward -1, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Hosur Hosur 635 109. [Pan: Adqpb 9089F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri B.B. Sathyamurthy, C.A., ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. D. Komali Krishna, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on 02 August 2017, offering income from Salaries of Rs. 25,56,189 and total income of Rs. 24,06, 190 (after allowing deduction under Chapter VI-A of Rs. 150,000) to tax and claiming a refund of Rs. 54,560, representing excess of TDS Credit over

K1444 METTUPALAYAM CO-OP. BUILDING SOCIETY LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT CPC , BEGNALURU

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.46/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 K1444 Mettupalayam Co-Op. Building Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Society Limited, Co-Operative Colony, Income Tax - Cpc, Mettupalayam, Coimbatore 641 301. Bengaluru. [Pan: Aadam3770D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate [Erode] ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 26.12.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 On 23.03.2019 Declaring Total Income At ₹.6,64,021/- After Claiming Deduction Under Section 80P Of 2

section 139(1) of the Act. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has erroneously dismissed the appeal despite the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay before the CBDT on 09.10.2019. 5

DCIT, DINDIGUL vs. BNAZRUM AGRO EXPORTS (P) LTD., DINDIGUL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes and the cross-objection of the assessee is dismissed as not pressed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.485/Mds/2015 & C.O. No.41/Mds/2015 (In I.T.A. No.485/Mds/2015) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Bnazrum Agro Exports (P) Ltd., Income Tax, V. Sirumalai Road, Erandalaparai, Circle – I, Dindigul. Rettiarpatti Post, Dindigul – 624 006. Pan : Aabcb 2418 B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent & Cross-Objector)

139(1) of the Act. (2) The CIT(A) has not given its reason why and what basis it is condoning the delay of filing the return of income by the respondent. (3) The CIT(A) erred in relying on case laws of Chennai and Hyderabad Tribunals which were clearly distinguished on facts by the CIT(A) in his detailed

JAYA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRL CIRCLE 1 (2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2012-13 & 2013-14 are allowed and for the assessment years

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2915, 3114, 3115/Chny/2019 & 916/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2017-18

5 months delay in filing return of income for the relevant assessment years. In our view reasons given by the assessee are bonafide, and hence, we are of the considered view that the authorities concerned are required to condone the delay in filing return of income. Further, it is not a case of the AO as well

JAYA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRL CIRCLE 1 (2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2012-13 & 2013-14 are allowed and for the assessment years

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2915, 3114, 3115/Chny/2019 & 916/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2017-18

5 months delay in filing return of income for the relevant assessment years. In our view reasons given by the assessee are bonafide, and hence, we are of the considered view that the authorities concerned are required to condone the delay in filing return of income. Further, it is not a case of the AO as well