JAGATHESH,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NCC-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1565/Chny/2025 ननिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Jagathesh, Acit, Flat 2A, Block V, Vs. Non- Corporate Circle - 11(1), Rani Meyammai Towers, Chennai. Mrc Nagar, Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan:Aclpj-4702-H] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1566/Chny/2025 ननिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Jagathesh, Acit, Flat 2A, Block V, Vs. Non- Corporate Circle - 11(1), Rani Meyammai Towers, Chennai. Mrc Nagar, Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan:Aclpj-4702-H] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

section 5 of the Limitation Act the courts should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case the consideration of prejudice to the other side will be a relevant factor so the case calls

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

In the result, the assessee succeeds on the legal ground

condoned the delay, we further note that the ground of appeal\nrelating to validity of the notice u/s.148 of the Act issued by the JAO on\n31.03.2022 urged before us is predominantly legal in nature and go to the very\nroot of the assessment proceedings. It is a settled proposition of law that where\na ground involves a pure question

DEVI MARINE FOOD EXPORTS P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for 9

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

156 and M. Loganathan v. CIT (Mad) 302 ITR 139. On the basis of the foregoing I am of the considered view that this is not a fit case for condonation of delay of 309 days of the appeal. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) relied on the judicial decisions and dismissed

THUTHIKULAM PACB LTD.,,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, WARD-2,, NAMAKKAL

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2544/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Thuthikulam Pacb Limited, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Thuthikulam, Namakkal 637 409, Ward 2, Tamil Nadu. Namakkal. [Pan: Aadft2362D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri A. Tamilamudhan, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Raghupathy, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.02.2024 Passed By The Addl/Jcit (A)-1, Noida For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 156 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Explaining Reasons For The Said Delay & Prayed For Condonation Of That Delay. On Perusal Of The Condonation Petition & Upon Hearing Both The Parties, We Find That The 2

156 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay explaining reasons for the said delay and prayed for condonation of that delay. On perusal of the condonation petition and upon hearing both the parties, we find that the 2 I.T.A. No.2544/Chny/24 reasons explained by the assessee are bonafide and therefore, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal

BASKARAN,TRICHY vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, TRICHY

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.751 & 752/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2014-15 Baskaran, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of 5, Ii Floor, Chitra Complex Trichy, Income Tax, Trichy 620 002. Circle 1, Thiruchirappalli. [Pan:Aadhb7838N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Raghav Rajeev Menon, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.07.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao:

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] dated 14,12,2017 by assessing total income of the assessee at ₹.39,53,441/- after making disallowance towards payments made to two companies incurred for software expenses of ₹.9,34,501/-. Similarly, for the assessment year 2014-15, the Assessing Officer made disallowance of rent payment

BASKARAN,TRICHY vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, TRICHY

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.751 & 752/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2014-15 Baskaran, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of 5, Ii Floor, Chitra Complex Trichy, Income Tax, Trichy 620 002. Circle 1, Thiruchirappalli. [Pan:Aadhb7838N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Raghav Rajeev Menon, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.07.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao:

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] dated 14,12,2017 by assessing total income of the assessee at ₹.39,53,441/- after making disallowance towards payments made to two companies incurred for software expenses of ₹.9,34,501/-. Similarly, for the assessment year 2014-15, the Assessing Officer made disallowance of rent payment

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

156 & 153/16-17 dated 23.01.2018 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11, respectively and the consolidated orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Madurai in ITA Nos. 125, 126 & :-2-: ITA No. 684, 685, 687 & 68/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 127/13-14 dated 31.05.2016 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

156 & 153/16-17 dated 23.01.2018 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11, respectively and the consolidated orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Madurai in ITA Nos. 125, 126 & :-2-: ITA No. 684, 685, 687 & 68/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 127/13-14 dated 31.05.2016 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

156 & 153/16-17 dated 23.01.2018 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11, respectively and the consolidated orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Madurai in ITA Nos. 125, 126 & :-2-: ITA No. 684, 685, 687 & 68/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 127/13-14 dated 31.05.2016 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

156 & 153/16-17 dated 23.01.2018 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11, respectively and the consolidated orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Madurai in ITA Nos. 125, 126 & :-2-: ITA No. 684, 685, 687 & 68/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 127/13-14 dated 31.05.2016 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

156 & 153/16-17 dated 23.01.2018 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11, respectively and the consolidated orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Madurai in ITA Nos. 125, 126 & :-2-: ITA No. 684, 685, 687 & 68/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 127/13-14 dated 31.05.2016 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

156 & 153/16-17 dated 23.01.2018 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11, respectively and the consolidated orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Madurai in ITA Nos. 125, 126 & :-2-: ITA No. 684, 685, 687 & 68/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 127/13-14 dated 31.05.2016 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

156 & 153/16-17 dated 23.01.2018 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11, respectively and the consolidated orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Madurai in ITA Nos. 125, 126 & :-2-: ITA No. 684, 685, 687 & 68/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 127/13-14 dated 31.05.2016 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively

ANNAI KANTHAMMAL RAMACHANDRAN EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,KRISHNAGIRI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD,, SALEM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

condone the delay in filing the appeal and now proceed to hear the case on merits. 3. At the outset, the Ld. AR for the assessee has raised an additional ground relating to jurisdiction of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (‘JAO’) in the light of the CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022 and the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court

GANESH CHAND SURESH KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-3(3), CHENNAI

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

condone the delay before FAA and admit the issue on\nmerits. Accordingly, we set aside the order of FAA and admit the\nissues raised by the assessee.\n:-3 -:\nITA No.3143/Chny/2025\n5. At the very outset, we notice that the assessee has raised a\nlegal ground (Ground No.10) challenging the validity of the\nassumption of jurisdiction for issuance of notice

MAVILAI PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD KV 92,KANYAKUMARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 1, NAGERCOIL

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

condone the delay in filing\nthe appeal and now proceed to hear the case on merits.\n3. At the outset, the Ld. AR for the assessee has raised an additional ground\nrelating to jurisdiction of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (‘JAO') in the light of\nthe CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022 and the decision of the Hon'ble Madras\nHigh Court

V. RAMU,PUDUKKOTTAI vs. ITO, PUDUKKOTTAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

condone the delay in filing the appeal for 156 days and proceed to hear the appeal on merits. 3. The assessee has raised three grounds in his appeal, however the crux of the issue is that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the order of the Ld.AO who had not granted interest on the tax deducted at source

KUPPAKOUNDER THANGAVELU,SALEM vs. ITO, WARD-1(8), SALEM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

condone the delay of ‘156’ days and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 3. The Ld.AR of the assessee first of all drew our attention to Ground No.4 of grounds of appeal and submitted that the assessment framed by the AO was barred by limitation and therefore, assessment order itself is non-est in the eyes

AA 291 THALAVADY PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOP CREDIT SOCIETY,ERODE vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), ERODE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.:2261 &2262/Chny/2025 यनिाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2015-16 Aa 291 Thalavady Primary Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Coop Credit Vs. Ward-2(1), Society, Erode. Sathy Road, Sathyamangalam, Erode, Tamil Nadu-638 461. [Pan:Aacaa1571B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Ms.A.Vijayalakshmi, C.A (Virtual), प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Revenue By : C.P.Solomon, Jcit

condoned the delay in filing of this appeal before him and had dismissed the appeals of the assessee in limine without adjudicating the issue on merits. This goes to the root of the matter and hence we are inclined to take the ground no.2 raised by the assessee in both the appeals first. 3.0 We have heard the rival submissions