BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

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.

7 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 194Hclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai23Delhi16Bangalore9Jaipur8Chennai7Kolkata5Hyderabad3Allahabad3Ahmedabad2Indore2Nagpur2Patna2Telangana1Visakhapatnam1Rajkot1SC1Surat1Lucknow1Chandigarh1

Key Topics

Section 406Addition to Income5Section 194H4Section 271(1)(c)4Deduction4TDS4Disallowance4Section 40a2Section 14A2Section 144

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. M/S SUNDARAM ASSET MANAGEMENT COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2281/CHNY/2025[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2280 & 2281/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Sundaram Asset Management Income Tax, Company Limited, Circle 1 (Ltu), Chennai. No. 46, Sundaram Towers, Whites Road, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014. [Pan: Aaics4257J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Venkat Ramanan, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. C. Vatchala, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Different Orders Dated 18.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 16, Chennai, For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2015-16. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We

For Appellant: Shri Venkat Ramanan, CAFor Respondent: Ms. C. Vatchala, JCIT
Section 14ASection 194HSection 40Section 40a

delay is condoned and admits the appeal for adjudication. 5. Ground No. 1 raised by the Revenue is general in nature and requires no adjudication. 6. Ground Nos. 2 to 5 raised by the Revenue in challenging the action of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition made under section 40a(ia) of the Income

2
Section 1482
Section 682

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME OF TAX, CHENNAI vs. M/S. SUNDARAM ASSET MANAGEMENT COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2280/CHNY/2025[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2280 & 2281/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Sundaram Asset Management Income Tax, Company Limited, Circle 1 (Ltu), Chennai. No. 46, Sundaram Towers, Whites Road, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014. [Pan: Aaics4257J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Venkat Ramanan, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. C. Vatchala, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Different Orders Dated 18.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 16, Chennai, For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2015-16. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We

For Appellant: Shri Venkat Ramanan, CAFor Respondent: Ms. C. Vatchala, JCIT
Section 14ASection 194HSection 40Section 40a

delay is condoned and admits the appeal for adjudication. 5. Ground No. 1 raised by the Revenue is general in nature and requires no adjudication. 6. Ground Nos. 2 to 5 raised by the Revenue in challenging the action of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition made under section 40a(ia) of the Income

SHRI NATARAJAN SOMASUNDARAM,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-8(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 788/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.788/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Natarajan Somasundaram, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, E-105, Periyar Vegetable Market, Non-Corporate Ward 8(2), Koyambedu, Chennai 600 092. Chennai. [Pan:Aajps6303B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.11.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 04.10.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 443 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, In The Interest Of Justice, We Condone The Delay Of 450 Days By Imposing Cost

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 24Section 32

condone the delay of 450 days by imposing cost 2 I.T.A. No.788/Chny/25 of ₹.5,000/- payable in favour of the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 3. Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is general in nature and requires

CHINNUSAMY SATHYA ,NAMAKKAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , NAMAKKAL

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1331/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1331 & 1332/Chny/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17 V. Chinnusamy Sathya, Income Tax Officer, No.9-119 Aathikattur, Anangur Post, Ward-2, Thiruchengode-Tk, Namakkal Namakkal, Tamil Nadu-637 304. [Pan: Ddqps3730F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T. S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca(Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2025 : घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 23.07.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T. S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Mr. Gauthami Manivasagam
Section 144Section 148Section 194HSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

condone the delay of ‘250’ days and proceed to adjudicate the grounds of both appeals raised by the assessee. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the case has been re-opened by issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 30.03.2021 after recording reason, to assess Commission or Brokerage income cover under section 194H

CHINNUSAMY SATHYA,NAMAKKAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, NAMAKKAL

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1332/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1331 & 1332/Chny/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17 V. Chinnusamy Sathya, Income Tax Officer, No.9-119 Aathikattur, Anangur Post, Ward-2, Thiruchengode-Tk, Namakkal Namakkal, Tamil Nadu-637 304. [Pan: Ddqps3730F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T. S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca(Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2025 : घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 23.07.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T. S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Mr. Gauthami Manivasagam
Section 144Section 148Section 194HSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

condone the delay of ‘250’ days and proceed to adjudicate the grounds of both appeals raised by the assessee. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the case has been re-opened by issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 30.03.2021 after recording reason, to assess Commission or Brokerage income cover under section 194H

FUJI ELECTRIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 701/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri. Siddhesh Chaugula, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, C.I.T
Section 92C

condone the delay in filing the appeal and adjudicate the same on the basis of grounds of appeal raised. 3. Ground No.1 is general in nature and no specific argument has been raised for these grounds by the Ld.AR. Hence, Ground No.1 of the Assessee does not call for any adjudication. 4. Ground No.2 is in relation to transfer pricing

T vs. CREDIT SERVICES LIMITED,CHENNAIVS.ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas that of cross objection of the assessee is party allowed

ITA 998/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Smt.T.V.Muthu Abirami, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 194ASection 201Section 251(1)Section 40

194H J. Golden Davy 2,25,000 Consultancy 194J Ghulam Hussin A 40,000 charges Engineering fees 194J Collate Consultants P. 5,40,000 Ltd Consultancy 194J Sivasankar S 45,000 charges Repairs and 194C Vehicle Service 82,500 Maintenance Repairs and 194C Acacia Dreams 3,00,000 Maintenance Travelling 194C Paid to Amex Card 3,72,625 Expenses Total