MR.JAYARAM SUBRAMANAIAM,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.26/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2018-19 Mr.Jayaram Subramaniam, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9A Nn Laxmi Street, Income Tax, Valasaravakkam, Central Circle-2(1), Aswathy, Chennai Chennai- 600 087. [Pan: Afaps5678H] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Ms.Lavanya, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt.Samantha Mullamudi, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate this appeal. 3.0 We have noted that the twin issues raised in this appeal by the appellant assessee are regarding firstly the invalidity of the assessment order passed by the National E-Assessment Center, Delhi and secondly the action of the Ld.CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal in limine. 4.0 As regards

CITY UNION BANK LIMITED,KUMBAKONAM vs. JCIT, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

CITY UNION BANK LIMITED,KUMBAKONAM vs. JCIT, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

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

GNANAPRAGASAM BHASKAR,DINDIGUL vs. ITO, NCW-1,, DINDIGUL

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3069/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Gnanapragasam Bhaskar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 7/22-C, Sahayamatha Colony, Non Corporate Ward 1, T.V.K. Nagar, Chinnalapatti Post, Dindigul. Dindigul 624 301. [Pan:Ahtpb8288M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Anandd Babunath, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Deeptha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.05.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.01.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 246 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit

246 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, 2 I.T.A. No.3069/Chny/24 we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication

HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LTD.,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar"नधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year: 2011-12 V. Hyundai Motor India Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of Plot No. H-1, Sipcot Industrial Park Income Tax, Irrungattukottai, 1775, Jawaharlal Nehru Inner Sriperumbudur Taluk, Ring Road, Kancheepuram District, Anna Nagar Western Tamil Nadu-602117 Extension, Chennai-600101 [Pan: Aaach2364M] (अपीलाथ+/Appellant) (,-यथ+/Respondent)

246 of the Income-tax Act. That is a matter which can more appropriately be dealt with by the Commissioner of Income- tax in the exercise of his revisional jurisdiction. But before the revisional jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Income-tax can be invoked in such a case, it is obviously necessary for the assessee to demonstrate before the Income

CRAFTS COUNCIL OF TAMILNADU,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT EXEMPTIONS, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.492/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2019-20 V. M/S.Crafts Council Of Tamilnadu, The Dy. Commissioner- 339, Vue Grande, Chinnasamy Road, Of Income Tax New Siddhapudur, (Exemptions), Coimbatore-641 044. Coimbatore. [Pan: Aaaac 1086 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.P.S.Sadasivan, Ca ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.08.2023

246 of the Act. 9. The Appellant humbly plead the Honourable Bench to set aside the order under section 154 and approve the claim of application of Rs.35,74,097/- and determine the income under the Provisions of Section 11 of the Act and pass such other or further orders as he may deem fit and proper in this case

P.K.C.PRABHU,MADURAI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-3, MADURAI

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

246 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by the assessee on the strength of condonation petition wherein it has been submitted that delay occurred due to lockdown situation arising out of Covid-19 pandemic. The impugned order is stated to have been received by the assessee on 19.03.2020 which falls in the lockdown period during

M/S FINANCIAL SOFTWARE AND SYSTEM PRIVATE LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT , CORPORATE CIRCLR -2 [1], CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.439/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Financial Software & Systems Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, 42, “Saradha”, Ground Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(1), Floor, 3Rd Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, Room No. 511, 5Th Floor, Wanaparthy Adyar, Chennai 600 020. Block, #121 Uttamar Gandhi Salai, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaacf2351C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ashik Shah, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A.S. Sumanth, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.08.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per G. Manjunatha: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai, Dated 25.02.2022, Relevant To The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 31 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal Due To Outbreak Of Covid-19 Pandemic & Accordingly, The Delay Is Condoned & Admitted The Appeal For Adjudication.

delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 2 I.T.A. No. 439/Chny/22 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, M/s. Financial Software and Systems Private Limited, is engaged in the business of Automated Teller Machine [ATM] management services and filed its return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on 29.11.2017 admitting total income

SRI NIDHI FINANCE,SALEM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(4), SALEM

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

condone the delay, that should be on\ncost. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case\nand submissions of the Id. AR and Id. DR, we deem it proper to\ncondone the delay subject to the condition of payment of cost of\n₹.50,000/- in favour of the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon'ble Madras\nHigh Court

THE HANDLOOM EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL,CHENNAI vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI

In the results, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos. 2130 & 2131/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-2011

1 Assessment year 2009-10, Annual report indicating 113 grants from 2 Ministries 2 Assessment year 2009-10, statement showing details 126 of grants from Ministry of Textiles 3 Assessment year 2009-10, grants-in-aid sanction 128,136, letters from Ministry of Textiles 140,146, 156, 166, 174 & 178 4 Assessment year 2009-10, Utilization certificates