Search: condonation of delay | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

Search Judgments
Browse by Bench
Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

31 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 144Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi132 Mumbai117 Kolkata36 Hyderabad36 Chennai31 Bangalore31 Pune27 Jaipur13 Ahmedabad11 Indore8 Nagpur5 Chandigarh5 Visakhapatnam3 Rajkot3 Cochin2 Dehradun2 Calcutta1 Lucknow1 Agra1 SC1 Raipur1 Cuttack1

Key Topics

Section 14822 Section 14721 Section 143(3)17 Addition to Income17 Section 144C(5)11 Section 148A8 Transfer Pricing8 Section 144C7 Section 143(2)

AALAYA JEWEL INDUSTRY PRIVATE LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 971/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P George

For Appellant: Miss S.Deepa, C.A ""For Respondent: Mrs.Ruby George, CIT, D.R

Section 144CSection 144C(2)Section 144C(4)Section 249(3)Section 253(5)Section 92C

Section 144C of the Act. As rightly pointed out by the ld.DRP, there is no power u/s.144C for the DRP to condone any delay

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2

7

Condonation of Delay7

Reopening of Assessment6

AALAYA JEWEL INDUSTRY PRIVATE LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 970/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P George

For Appellant: Miss S.Deepa, C.A ""For Respondent: Mrs.Ruby George, CIT, D.R

Section 144CSection 144C(2)Section 144C(4)Section 249(3)Section 253(5)Section 92C

Section 144C of the Act. As rightly pointed out by the ld.DRP, there is no power u/s.144C for the DRP to condone any delay

ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2757/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.: 21/Chny/2022 & 40/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Tpo Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 797 & 798/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2757/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1672/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Assessee By Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2023

For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

Section 43A are of revenue in nature and corresponding effect of exchange differences are to be accorded in the Profit & Loss Account. 14. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to appreciate the fact that the Rs. method followed by the assessee being based on 16,61,77,507/ guidance (Accounting Standards) issued by the ICAI, is very scientific, approved and considered

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. ABAN OFFSHORE LTD., CHENNAI

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

ITA 1672/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.: 21/Chny/2022 & 40/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Tpo Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 797 & 798/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2757/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1672/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Assessee By Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2023

For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

Section 43A are of revenue in nature and corresponding effect of exchange differences are to be accorded in the Profit & Loss Account. 14. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to appreciate the fact that the Rs. method followed by the assessee being based on 16,61,77,507/ guidance (Accounting Standards) issued by the ICAI, is very scientific, approved and considered

M/S ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CORPORATE CIRCLE, CHENNAI

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

ITA 797/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.: 21/Chny/2022 & 40/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Tpo Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 797 & 798/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2757/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1672/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Assessee By Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2023

For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

Section 43A are of revenue in nature and corresponding effect of exchange differences are to be accorded in the Profit & Loss Account. 14. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to appreciate the fact that the Rs. method followed by the assessee being based on 16,61,77,507/ guidance (Accounting Standards) issued by the ICAI, is very scientific, approved and considered

M/S. ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCITCORPORATE CIRCLE1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 798/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.: 21/Chny/2022 & 40/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Tpo Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 797 & 798/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2757/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1672/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Assessee By Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2023

For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

Section 43A are of revenue in nature and corresponding effect of exchange differences are to be accorded in the Profit & Loss Account. 14. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to appreciate the fact that the Rs. method followed by the assessee being based on 16,61,77,507/ guidance (Accounting Standards) issued by the ICAI, is very scientific, approved and considered

REGEN RENEWABLE ENERGY GENERATION GLOBAL LTD, CYPRUS,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -2(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 153/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.153/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Regen Renewable Energy Generation Global Limited, Income Tax, Cyprus International Taxation – 2(1), C/O M/S. Regen Powertech Pvt. Ltd., Chennai – 34. Krm Plaza, 7Th Floor, North Tower, No.2, Harrington Road, Chennai – 600 031. Pan: Aafcr0685N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Srinivasa Rao, Cit

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri M. Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 144Section 144C(13)Section 153

delay of 31 days is condoned and the appeal is admitted. 3. Shri B. Ramakrishnan, the Ld. Representative for the assessee submitted that in the course of assessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for determination of Arm’s Length Price in respect of international transactions. However the TPO found that no adjustment

TIONG WOON PROJECT & CONTRACTING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 419/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.419/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri K. Meenatchi Sundaram, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT

Section 144CSection 144C(2)Section 144C(5)

condone the delay in filing he objection, consequently the direction given under Section 144C(5) of the Act cannot be given

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MYUNGHWA AUTOMOTIVE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1186/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Mr.Raghunathan Sampath

delay is condoned. 3.0 Background of the Company: M/s.Myunghwa Automotive Private Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of M/s.Myunghwa Industrial Company Limited, South Korea Myunghwa Automotive Pvt Ltd incorporated as Private Limited Company under the Companies Act, during September 2007. The ITA No.1186/Mds/2016 & CO No.179/Mds/2016 :- 3 -: Company is having its manufacturing facility in Sriperumbadur. The Company is mainly engaged

SIVA INDUSTRIES AND HOLDINGS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

ITA 1973/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Chennai21 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“Act”) is not in accordance with the law, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the present case and is in violation of principle of equity and natural justice. Validity of the Assessment Proceedings 2. The AO erred in passing the assessment order in the name of a non-existent company and hence

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

ITA 1421/CHNY/2016[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2020AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“Act”) is not in accordance with the law, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the present case and is in violation of principle of equity and natural justice. Validity of the Assessment Proceedings 2. The AO erred in passing the assessment order in the name of a non-existent company and hence

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

ITA 1075/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“Act”) is not in accordance with the law, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the present case and is in violation of principle of equity and natural justice. Validity of the Assessment Proceedings 2. The AO erred in passing the assessment order in the name of a non-existent company and hence

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

ITA 663/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“Act”) is not in accordance with the law, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the present case and is in violation of principle of equity and natural justice. Validity of the Assessment Proceedings 2. The AO erred in passing the assessment order in the name of a non-existent company and hence

TECTON ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION LLC,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 358/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 358/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)

condone the delay in filing of appeal and admit the appeal filed by the assessee for adjudication. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation - 2(2), Chennai dated 30.01.2016 for the above assessment year is contrary to law, facts, and in the circumstances

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 3(1), CHENNAI vs. M/S. TRIUMPH INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 745/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.745/Chny/2025

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate this appeal. 3.0 The only issue contested by the Revenue through its grounds of appeal is regarding the decision of Ld.CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs.23,79,08,002/- on account of unobserved depreciation. Brief factual matrix of the case is that the assessee company M/s. Triumph International (India) Private Limited

M/S. SECUREKLOUD TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE CIRCLE-3(1),, CHENNAI

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

ITA 3232/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3232/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 M/S. Securekloud Technologies Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Limited, Bascon Futura Sv 5Th Floor, Corporate Circle 3(1), 10/1 Venkatanarayana Road, T. Nagar, Chennai. Chennai 600 017. [Pan:Aabcp6266D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M.V. Swaroop, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A. Sasi Kumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.04.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 27.09.2024 Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 18 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, We Find The Reasons Stated By The Assessee Are Bonafide, Which Really

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Swaroop, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasi Kumar, CIT

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] for the assessment year 2021-22. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 18 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. AUTONEUM NITTOKU SOUND PROOF PRODUCTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, Revenue appeal is dismissed

ITA 1956/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarअपील अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A. No. 1956/Mds/2016 अपील िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2009-10 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Autoneum Nittoku Sound Proof Tax, Vs. Products India Private Limited, Corporate Circle -1(1), Plot No. Rns 15, Sipcot Industrial Chennai - 600 034. Growth Centre, Oragadam, Vadakupattu Post, Kanchipuram, 603 204. [Pan: Aaecr 1409H]

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate

Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)Section 271ASection 92D(1)

delay is condoned and appeal is admitted. 3. The Revenue has raised the following grounds: 3.1 The Ld. CIT(A) has erred allowing the appeal of the assessee by holding that the penalty order does not survive since the matter has been remitted back to the TPO for reconsideration. 3.2 The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that fact that

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRLCE - 3 (2),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. VENTURE LIGHTING INDIA LTD.,, CHENNAI

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

ITA 704/CHNY/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.704/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Venture Lighting India Ltd., Income Tax, Plot No. A-30, D-5, Phase Ii, Corporate Circle – 3(2), Zone-B, Mepz, Tambaram, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai 600 045. [Pan: Aaaca9284H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 19.10.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Chennai, Dated 09.03.2020 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Delayed By 78 Days In Filing The Appeal Due To Outbreak Of Covid-19 Pandemic & Hence, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned & Admitted The Appeal For 2

For Appellant: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234C

delay in filing the appeal is condoned and admitted the appeal for 2 I.T.A. No.704/Chny/20 adjudication. 3. Facts are, in brief that the assessee company filed its return of income for the assessment year 2008-09 originally on 23.09.2008 with a returned income of ₹.3,85,36,870/-. The assessee has also filed a revised return of income

MANIMOZHIAN VAIDEKI,SIVAGANGAI vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2025/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.:2025/Chny/2025 यनिाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2016-17 Manimozhian Vaideki, The Assistant Commissioner No.77, Ward-1, Devappattu Vs. Of Income Tax, Kallal, International Taxation Circle, Sivagangai, Madurai. Tamil Nadu-630 305. [Pan:Azcpv7593C] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr.N.Arjun Raj, Advocate प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Revenue By : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit

For Appellant: Mr.N.Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT

Section 144C(5)Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)(a)

section 144C(5) of the Act and before the finalization of the final assessment order, the Assessee opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The said Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme application stood rejected by the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. Thereafter, the Assessee filed a rectification petition before the Learned PCIT which was stated to be not disposed

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

ITA 3252/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

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

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri AR.V Sreenivasan, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

144C of the Act. Therefore, the Ld.DR submitted ground Nos. 4 to 6 raised by the assessee may be rejected. 16. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The adjustment / disallowances referred supra at :- 12 -: para 12 of our order has been made admittedly in the intimation issued u/s.143(1) of the Act. In the final