POOJA PRABHAKAR,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 15(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

delay, was neither deliberate nor intentional but occurred due to bona fide reasons, and thus deserved to be condoned in the interest of substantial justice. 2. Without prejudice to the above, that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the assessment order dated 23.03.2022 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre [“Assessing Officer”] u/s.147 r.w.s

RAJALAKSHMI VETTRIVEL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

section 273B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, must necessarily have a relation to the failure on the part of the assessee to comply with the requirement of the law which he had failed to comply with. In the case of delay in compliance, the cause shown must be for the whole of the period of the delay

RAJALAKSHMI VETTRIVEL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

section 273B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, must necessarily have a relation to the failure on the part of the assessee to comply with the requirement of the law which he had failed to comply with. In the case of delay in compliance, the cause shown must be for the whole of the period of the delay

RAJALAKSHMI VETTRIVEL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

section 273B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, must necessarily have a relation to the failure on the part of the assessee to comply with the requirement of the law which he had failed to comply with. In the case of delay in compliance, the cause shown must be for the whole of the period of the delay

RAJALAKSHMI VETTRIVEL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

section 273B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, must necessarily have a relation to the failure on the part of the assessee to comply with the requirement of the law which he had failed to comply with. In the case of delay in compliance, the cause shown must be for the whole of the period of the delay

RAJALAKSHMI VETTRIVEL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

section 273B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, must necessarily have a relation to the failure on the part of the assessee to comply with the requirement of the law which he had failed to comply with. In the case of delay in compliance, the cause shown must be for the whole of the period of the delay

RAJALAKSHMI VETTRIVEL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

section 273B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, must necessarily have a relation to the failure on the part of the assessee to comply with the requirement of the law which he had failed to comply with. In the case of delay in compliance, the cause shown must be for the whole of the period of the delay

YUGENDIRAN VISHNUPRIYA,CHENNAI vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), CHENNAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3241 &3242/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2016-2017 & 2017-18) Yugendiran Vishnupriya Vs. Income Tax Officer, Door No.284/3, International Tax, Thiruveni Colony, Bellyarea, Ward 2(2) Anna Nagar, Chennai-600040 Chennai. [Pan: Apzpv 9903M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr. Y. Sridhar, F.C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.03.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

condone the delay and treat the reasons as ‘sufficient cause’ and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal for AYs 2016-17 and 2017-18: Grounds of appeal for assessment year 2016-2017 ‘’1. The order of the Dispute Resolution Panel against the draft assessment order by the Id. AO is contrary

YUGENDIRAN VISHNUPRIYA,CHENNAI vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), CHENNAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3241 &3242/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2016-2017 & 2017-18) Yugendiran Vishnupriya Vs. Income Tax Officer, Door No.284/3, International Tax, Thiruveni Colony, Bellyarea, Ward 2(2) Anna Nagar, Chennai-600040 Chennai. [Pan: Apzpv 9903M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr. Y. Sridhar, F.C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.03.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

condone the delay and treat the reasons as ‘sufficient cause’ and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal for AYs 2016-17 and 2017-18: Grounds of appeal for assessment year 2016-2017 ‘’1. The order of the Dispute Resolution Panel against the draft assessment order by the Id. AO is contrary

POOJA PRABHAKAR,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 15(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:3046, 3047 & 3048/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Pooja Prabhakar, 17 Kingston Apartments, M G Ramachandran Road Kalakshetra Colony, Chennai - 600 090. [Pan: Bcgpp-8061-H] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By Ito, Vs. Non-Corp Ward -15(1), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Mr. R. Venkataraman, Fca & Mr. K. Vishwa Padmanabhan, Fca. : Shri. Arv Sreenivasan, Cit. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /Order Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am : : 16.12.2025 : 01.01.2026 These Three Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders, Each Dated 25.08.2025, Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”). The Impugned Orders Arise Out Of The Assessments Framed By The National Faceless Assessment Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The "Ao”) U/S.147 R.W.S 144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"), Pertaining To Assessment Years 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 :-2-:

delay, was neither deliberate nor intentional but occurred due to bona fide reasons, and thus deserved to be condoned in the interest of substantial justice. 2. Without prejudice to the above, that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the assessment order dated 23.03.2022 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre [“Assessing Officer”] u/s.147 r.w.s

POOJA PRABHAKAR,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 15(1), CHENNAI , CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:3046, 3047 & 3048/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Pooja Prabhakar, 17 Kingston Apartments, M G Ramachandran Road Kalakshetra Colony, Chennai - 600 090. [Pan: Bcgpp-8061-H] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By Ito, Vs. Non-Corp Ward -15(1), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Mr. R. Venkataraman, Fca & Mr. K. Vishwa Padmanabhan, Fca. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Arv Sreenivasan, Cit. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.01.2026 आदेश /Order Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am : These Three Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders, Each Dated 25.08.2025, Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”). The Impugned Orders Arise Out Of The Assessments Framed By The National Faceless Assessment Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The "Ao”) U/S.147 R.W.S 144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"), Pertaining To Assessment Years 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 :-2-:

delay, was neither deliberate nor intentional but occurred due to bona fide reasons, and thus deserved to be condoned in the interest of substantial justice. 2. Without prejudice to the above, that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the assessment order dated 23.03.2022 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre [“Assessing Officer”] u/s.147 r.w.s

INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI (WOMEN),MADURAI vs. CIT, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

section 12 AA (1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 rejecting the application for registration u/s. 12AA of the Act. Both the appeals arise from the issue of rejection of 2. Sec.12AA registration by the Revenue. Before the Tribunal, the assessee has filed two condonation applications for condoning the delay in filing the appeals in ITA Nos.612 & 613/Mds/2015

INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI (WOMEN),MADURAI vs. CIT, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

section 12 AA (1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 rejecting the application for registration u/s. 12AA of the Act. Both the appeals arise from the issue of rejection of 2. Sec.12AA registration by the Revenue. Before the Tribunal, the assessee has filed two condonation applications for condoning the delay in filing the appeals in ITA Nos.612 & 613/Mds/2015

ITO (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI vs. RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR JAINOLOGY,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri. G. Pavan Kumar

section took place and the processing of the CIT(A)'s orders started to take place in the Office of the jurisdictional CIT itself, which added to the confusion in locating the judicial folder for the assessment year 2009-10. Immediately, after tracing the said folder for the ITA No.1514/Mds/2015. :- 4 -: assessment year 2009-10, the order of the learned

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. SMT. SURUMY MAMMOTTY, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2962 & 2963/Chny/16 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. Shri Sailendra Mamidi, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that there was a search in the premises of one Shri Mammotty, father of the assessee. The assessee is engaged in the profession of creative designing. During the course of search operation, according to the Ld. D.R., some material was found. On that basis

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. SMT. SURUMY MAMMOTTY, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2962 & 2963/Chny/16 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. Shri Sailendra Mamidi, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that there was a search in the premises of one Shri Mammotty, father of the assessee. The assessee is engaged in the profession of creative designing. During the course of search operation, according to the Ld. D.R., some material was found. On that basis

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2460, 2461, 2462 & 2463/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 M/S. Abc Gold Palace, 14-A, Mela Veethi, Thiruthuraipoondi, Tiruvarur – 614 713. Pan: Aanfa 5950Eе (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement The Deputy Commissioner Vs. Of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(3), Chennai (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Dr. Abhishek Murali, Ca (Through Virtual Mode) : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Cit : 25.02.2026 : 25.02.2026 आदेश/ Order Per Bench: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Four Different Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-20, All Dated 26.05.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called 'The Act'). The Relevant

condone the delay and proceed to dispose off the appeals on merits. 3. At the outset, we notice that assessee has filed additional grounds raising legal issue. The legal issue raised in the additional ground is regarding validity of notice issued u/s.153C of the Act subsequent to 01.04.2021 (According to the assessee notice should have been issued u/s.148

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2460, 2461, 2462 & 2463/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 M/S. Abc Gold Palace, 14-A, Mela Veethi, Thiruthuraipoondi, Tiruvarur – 614 713. Pan: Aanfa 5950Eе (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement The Deputy Commissioner Vs. Of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(3), Chennai (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Dr. Abhishek Murali, Ca (Through Virtual Mode) : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Cit : 25.02.2026 : 25.02.2026 आदेश/ Order Per Bench: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Four Different Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-20, All Dated 26.05.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called 'The Act'). The Relevant

condone the delay and proceed to dispose off the appeals on merits. 3. At the outset, we notice that assessee has filed additional grounds raising legal issue. The legal issue raised in the additional ground is regarding validity of notice issued u/s.153C of the Act subsequent to 01.04.2021 (According to the assessee notice should have been issued u/s.148

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

condone the delay and proceed to dispose off the appeals on merits. 3. At the outset, we notice that assessee has filed additional grounds raising legal issue. The legal issue raised in the additional ground is regarding validity of notice issued u/s.153C of the Act subsequent to 01.04.2021 (According to the assessee notice should have been issued u/s.148