SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

ANNAMALAI PALANIAPPAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NCC-7(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayannamalai Palaniappan, D.C.I.T., 35, Orur Olcott Road, 5Th Vs. Non-Corporate Circle 7(1), Avenue, Besant Nagar S.O., Chennai. Besant Nagar, Chennai-600090 (Tamil Nadu) Pan No. Aahpp 0725 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

220 days. The Petitioner states that the delay is only on account of bonafide reasonable cause as stated above. The delay was primarily due to the appellant's lack of knowledge about the ongoing penalty proceedings and the fact that the appellant was not able to access the necessary information via the portal on time. And, this delay was purely

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

condone the delay of two days in filing the appeals and admit the appeals for adjudication. Since, the identical facts and issues are involved in these 3. appeals, we proceed to dispose the same vide this common order. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to 4. the appeal in ITA No.2280/Chny/2018 for assessment year

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

condone the delay of two days in filing the appeals and admit the appeals for adjudication. Since, the identical facts and issues are involved in these 3. appeals, we proceed to dispose the same vide this common order. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to 4. the appeal in ITA No.2280/Chny/2018 for assessment year

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

condone the delay of two days in filing the appeals and admit the appeals for adjudication. Since, the identical facts and issues are involved in these 3. appeals, we proceed to dispose the same vide this common order. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to 4. the appeal in ITA No.2280/Chny/2018 for assessment year

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

condone the delay of two days in filing the appeals and admit the appeals for adjudication. Since, the identical facts and issues are involved in these 3. appeals, we proceed to dispose the same vide this common order. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to 4. the appeal in ITA No.2280/Chny/2018 for assessment year

SRI BAKTHISARA PATTANGI RANGA RAMANUJA,,THIRUVALLUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD - 1,, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1789/Chny/2019

220 days in filing the appeal and the assessee has filed affidavit for condonation of delay by submitting as under: “1. I am the Founder cum Managing Trustee of Petitioner herein, and as Such aware of the facts and circumstances of the case and I am competent to swear this affidavit on behalf of the Petitioner. I submit that

IDUMBEN KNITTERS, ,TIRUPUR CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1TIRUPUR, TIRUPUR, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 711/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Idumban Knitters Assistant Commissioner Of S.F. No. 440, 443, Sbi Colony, V. Income Tax, Gandhi Nagar Post, Circle-1, Tirupur – 641 603. Tirupur. [Pan: Aaafi-7635-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. M A Srinivasan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.08.2023

delay in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal filed by the assessee is admitted for hearing. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Petitioner is an Assessee /Appellant, being a partnership firm in the Name and style of M/s. ldumban Knitters, is an MSME, manufacturer, exporter and Traders of Garments of all kinds, having

M/S. P.P. FINANCIERS,KARUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, COIMBATORE

condoned. In respect of the remaining assessees, there is no delay in filing the appeals, and proof of receipt of the orders of the ld. CIT(A) has been duly enclosed with Form No. 36.\nFurther, since all the 61 appeals arise out of the same search proceedings, and the issues involved therein are common, identical, and interconnected, the appeals

P KUPPUCHAMY,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, COIMBATORE

220, 221 & 222/Chny/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2010-11, 2017-18 & 2018-19\n&\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.200, 201 to 208/Chny/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2011-12 to 2018-19\n&\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.3388 to 3392/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2018-19\nM/s. P.P. Financers, 24, Radha Avenue, 3rd Street

SELLAMUTHU KABILAN, BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CRICLE 3, COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE

220, 221 & 222/Chny/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2010-11, 2017-18 & 2018-19\n&\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.200, 201 to 208/Chny/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2011-12 to 2018-19\n&\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.3388 to 3392/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2018-19\nM/s. P.P. Financers, 24, Radha Avenue, 3rd Street