ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, CUDDALLORE vs. M/S VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD., VILLUPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

THE CUDDALORE DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD.,CUDDALORE vs. DCIT CUDDALORE CIRCLE, CUDDALORE

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERTATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. DCIT, VILLUPURAM CIRCLE,, VILLUPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-I,, CUDDALORE

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-II,, CUDDALORE

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. DCIT, VILLUPURAM CIRCLE,, VILLUPRUAM

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. DCIT, VILLUPURAM CIRCLE,, VILLUPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

ABC GOLD PALACE,TIRUVARUR vs. ITO, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are\npartly-allowed

142 has been issued to\nhim, or\n(b) a return of income has been furnished by such other person but\nno notice under sub-section (2) of section 143 has been served and\nlimitation of serving the notice under sub-section (2) of section 143\nhas expired, or\n(c) assessment or reassessment, if any, has been made, before

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

142(1) of the Act and submits that the Assessing officer called for several details as evident in point at 11, 12, 13 and 17. He submits that the assessee filed detailed response on 20.06.2016 including the objects constituted with main limbs of charitable purpose specified under section 2(15) of the Act and referred to page

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]

delay request before the appropriate authority in accordance with CBDT Circular No. 13 of 2023 and the Assessing Officer shall revisit the deduction claim of the assessee on disposal of the condonation petition. 6. The ld.AR filed the coordinate orders of the Tribunal which have decided the issue in question in favour of the assessee. The details of the orders

M/S. TRIVITRON HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. PCIT, , CHENNAI-3

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly\nallowed

condone delay in filing of appeal\nand admit appeal filed by the assessee for adjudication.\n3.\nThe only issue in the appeal of assessee is as against the\nrevision order passed by the PCIT u/s.263 of the Act that he failed\nto satisfy the twin conditions i.e., for order passes by the AO\nu/s.143(3) of the Act, is erroneous

ABC GOLD PALACE,TIRUVARUR vs. ITO, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are\npartly-allowed

condone the delay and proceed to\ndispose off the appeals on merits.\n3. At the outset, we notice that assessee has filed additional\ngrounds raising legal issue. The legal issue raised in the additional\nground is regarding validity of notice issued u/s.153C of the Act\nsubsequent to 01.04.2021 (According to the assessee notice should\nhave been issued u/s.148

D.SENTHIL KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

142(1)/143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. have concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. You are hereby required to appear before me at 11.00 A.M on 07-04-2014 and show cause why an order imposing a penalty on you should not be made under section 271(1

ABC GOLD PALACE,TIRUVARUR vs. ITO, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are\npartly-allowed

142 has been issued to\nhim, or\n(b) a return of income has been furnished by such other person but\nno notice under sub-section (2) of section 143 has been served and\nlimitation of serving the notice under sub-section (2) of section 143\nhas expired, or\n(c) assessment or reassessment, if any, has been made, before

ABC GOLD PALACE,TIRUVARUR vs. ITO, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are\npartly-allowed

condone the delay and proceed to\ndispose off the appeals on merits.\n3. At the outset, we notice that assessee has filed additional\ngrounds raising legal issue. The legal issue raised in the additional\nground is regarding validity of notice issued u/s.153C of the Act\nsubsequent to 01.04.2021 (According to the assessee notice should\nhave been issued u/s.148

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. R K M POWERGEN PRIVATE LIMITED, T NAGAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue for the both the

condone delay in filing of appeal and admit appeal filed by the revenue for adjudication.\n3.\nThe revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal for the A.Y. 2013-14:\n“2. The learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made u/s. 56(1) of the IT Act, amounting to Rs.615.34 crores, being income from other sources

M/S. TATVA RENEWABLE POWER PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1769/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Ojas Plantations Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aabco1853F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1770/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Pippala Leaf Developers Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aahcp2411J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1771/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Tatva Renewable Power Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaect8340D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 5. Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is reproduced herein below: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned Assessing Officer has erred in invoking the provision of section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that

M/S. OJAS PLANTATIONS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1769/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Ojas Plantations Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aabco1853F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1770/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Pippala Leaf Developers Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aahcp2411J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1771/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Tatva Renewable Power Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaect8340D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 5. Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is reproduced herein below: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned Assessing Officer has erred in invoking the provision of section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that