MANSI FINANCE CHENNAI LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ACIT, CC 4(1), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 108 & 109/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

condonation of delay in 4 I.T.A. Nos.108 & 109/Chny/21 filing the appeals, the assessee submits that the accountant dealing the tax matter went on long leave and did not report for duty for almost 2 months and therefore, the service of the incumbent was terminated w.e.f. 10.10.2017, i.e., from the date of leave. It was also submitted that the management

MANSI FINANCE CHENNAI LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ACIT, CC-4(1), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 108 & 109/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

condonation of delay in 4 I.T.A. Nos.108 & 109/Chny/21 filing the appeals, the assessee submits that the accountant dealing the tax matter went on long leave and did not report for duty for almost 2 months and therefore, the service of the incumbent was terminated w.e.f. 10.10.2017, i.e., from the date of leave. It was also submitted that the management

HEENA G JAIN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT/DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2025 िनधा7रण वष7 /Assessment Year: 2016-17

143(1) of the Act on 15.03.2018, wherein the Heena G. Jain :- 2 -: total income was determined at Rs. 43,26,444/- and a demand of Rs.8,29,910/- was raised. While processing, CPC assessed income from business and profession at Rs. 23,85,763/- as against a loss of Rs. 1,14,320/- declared by the assessee. Aggrieved

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2014-15,\n2017-18 & 2018-19 are allowed and the appeal for AY 2015-16 is partly\nallowed

condonation\nunder section 119(2)(b) of the Act before the Id. CIT(E). The Id. CIT(E)\ncondoned the said delay in filing Form 10A vide his order dated\n30.11.2016 and referred to page 82 of the paper book. He vehemently\nargued that the Assessing Officer, considering all the details, accepted\nthe returned income and formed an opinion that

P.SHANMUGAM,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.202/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-2012. Shri. P. Shanmugam, Vs. Income Tax Officer, No.11/1, Arumugam Layout, Non Corporate Ward I (5) Anna Nagar, Peelamedu, [Previously Ward Ii (4)] Coimbatore 641 004. Coimbatore

Delay is condoned and appeal is admitted. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there was no 5. issuance of notice u/s.143(2) of the Act. As per ld. Authorised Representative it was an assessment which was reopened pursuant to a survey u/s.133A of the Act in the premises of the assessee. As per ld. Authorised Representative assessee had filed

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]

143(1)(a). Upon consideration of the facts and submissions, it is observed that the provisions of section 80AC mandate that no deduction under section 80P shall be allowed unless the return is filed within the due date specified under section 139(1). Section 80AC was introduced to ensure timely compliance with tax filing obligations for claiming deductions under Chapter

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 ()

143(1) read with Section 154 of the Act to the learned Joint Commissioner of Appeals (JCIT-(A))/ Commissioner of Appeals (CIT(A)) on 15 July 2024 (within 30 days from the date of order under Section 154), along with a petition for condonation of delay

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

section 143(3) of the Act dated 26.11.2018 disallowing balance accumulation of receipts of ₹.30,00,000/-. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee has filed application for condonation of delay

PREETI MADHOK,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW -2 (5),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as not

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.752/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Mrs.Preeti Madhok, V. The Income Tax Officer, ‘G’ Block, Flat No.1504, Non-Corporate Ward-2(5), Metrozone (Next To Vr Mall), Chennai. No.44, Pillaiyar Koil Street, Anna Nagar, Chennai-600 040. [Pan: Bcopm 7655 J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

section 56(2)(vii)(b) are not invocable in the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. For that without prejudice to the above, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax failed to appreciate that no addition can be made in the hands of the appellant since the entire consideration for the property purchased during the impugned assessment year was paid

SUNTEC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

section 143(1) of the Act, a liberal approach may be taken for condonation of delay since assessee’s application

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

THEVOOR PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY ,SALEM vs. ITO , WARD -1(6) , SALEM

The appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.600/Chny/2022 िनधा)रण वष) /Assessment Year: 2018-19 Thevoor Primary Agricultural Co- The Income Tax Officer, Operative Credit Society, Vs. Ward-1(6), Thevoor Village, Thevoor Post, Salem. Sankari Taluk, Salem Dist. – 637 301. [Pan: Aacat-0942-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.05.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. The sole grievance of the assessee is denial of deduction under section 80P of the Act while processing the return u/s 143

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2014-15,\n2017-18 & 2018-19 are allowed and the appeal for AY 2015-16 is partly\nallowed

condonation\nunder section 119(2)(b) of the Act before the Id. CIT(E). The Id. CIT(E)\ncondoned the said delay in filing Form 10A vide his order dated\n30.11.2016 and referred to page 82 of the paper book. He vehemently\nargued that the Assessing Officer, considering all the details, accepted\nthe returned income and formed an opinion that

SENTHILMURUGAN JEWELLERS PVT. LTD.,,MADURAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-2,, MADURAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Senthil Murugan Jewellers Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., 106, 107 & 108, South Income Tax, Avani Moola Street, Madurai 625 001. Corporate Circle 2, [Pan:Aajcs8546F] Madurai 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Mohan Reddy, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.12.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Madurai-1, Madurai, Dated 31.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. 2. The appeal filed by the assessee is time barred by 449 days delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. In the form of an affidavit, the assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay, wherein, following submissions were made: 2 I.T.A. No. 768/Chny/20 “1. That

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2023/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 V. Ramasamy Kandasamy, The Ito, No.4/76, Sf No.927, Sukkaliyur, Ward-1, Karur-639 003. Karur. [Pan: Ajgpk 4945 H]

condoning the delay, the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the cause for the delay. Having gone through the contents of the same, we find that cause Ramasamy Kandasamy :: 2 :: for delay was reasonable, so we excuse the same and proceed to hear the assessee’s appeal on merits. 3. The assessee has raised a legal issue that

M/S EPIMONEY PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO/ACIT, CORPORATE WARD-3(3), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.727/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Epimoney Private Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer/Acit, No. 119, 2Nd Floor, Greenways Towers, Corporate Ward 3(3), St. Mary’S Road, Abhiramapuram, Chennai. Chennai 600 018. [Pan:Aaacu1013A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.11.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-Chennai 3, Chennai, Dated 30.03.2023 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2018-19 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

delay in filing of the appeal stands condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its return of income for the assessment year 2018-19 on 29.09.2018 claiming a total loss of ₹.3,58,59,222/-. The assessment under section 143

C C 2355 NAMBIAMPALAYAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,TIRUPUR vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU

The appeal stand partly allowed

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

delay ought to have been condoned by Ld. CIT(A). Nevertheless, I find that this issue, on merits, stand covered in assessee’s favor by the decision of co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in Chennai Kulalars Co-operative Credit Society Limited vs. DCIT (ITA No.712/Chny/2022) for AY 2018-19 as under: - 3. The relevant provisions of Section 143

NATARAJAN,CUDDALORE vs. ITO,ITWARD-1(1) , CHENNAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriand Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.123/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-2012 Shri Natarajan The Income Tax Officer, 353, Pudupettai Main Road, Vs. International Taxation, Indira Nagar, C. Puthupettai, Ward 2(1), Parangipettai Post, Chennai 600 006 Cuddalore 608 502. Pan: Anfpn 9506Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. J. Saravanan, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Samuel Pitta, Irs, Jcit.

condonation of delay stating the following reasons:- ‘’I, M.Kuppusamy, S/o. Mottayappan, Hindu, aged about 64 years, residing at 353, Pudupettai Main Road Indira Nagar, Cuddalore 608 502, do solemnly affirm and state as follows: 1. That I am the brother of Shri. M.Natarajan who is a non- resident Indian and residing in London, U.K. since 1998 and my brother used