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.

70 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 246Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi167Indore89Pune77Chennai70Mumbai67Raipur50Bangalore46Panaji32Cochin25Kolkata22Chandigarh17Nagpur13Hyderabad12Patna11Jaipur11Visakhapatnam10Amritsar9Ahmedabad8Lucknow5Jodhpur3Cuttack3Agra2Surat2Dehradun2Karnataka1Rajkot1Telangana1Varanasi1Guwahati1Jabalpur1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 234E190Section 200A84TDS61Section 15452Deduction23Section 244A21Section 80P(2)(a)21Section 200(3)20Section 246A19Charitable Trust

JAGANNATHAN BASKAR,HOSUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, , HOSUR

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

ITA 2629/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2629/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-2018) Jagannathan Baskar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, H88, New Astc Hudco, Ward -1, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Hosur Hosur 635 109. [Pan: Adqpb 9089F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri B.B. Sathyamurthy, C.A., ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. D. Komali Krishna, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri B.B. Sathyamurthy, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. D. Komali Krishna, IRS, CIT
Section 10Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

condonation of delay in filing appeal under section 246A of the Act 2 Petition for condonation of delay in filing

Showing 1–20 of 70 · Page 1 of 4

18
Section 206C(3)14
Natural Justice14

RAVI PRABHAKAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 15(3), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1153/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1153/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. N. Devanathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 246ASection 249

condoned, the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. 3. " Every day's delay must be explained " does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour's delay, every second's delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational, common sense and pragmatic manner

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

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

ITA 688/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

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)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions 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

ITA 686/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

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)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions 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

ITA 685/CHNY/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2007-08

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)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions 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

ITA 2444/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

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)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions 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

ITA 2443/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2007-08

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)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions 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

ITA 687/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

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)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions 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

ITA 2445/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

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)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009- 10, respectively

V. RAMU,PUDUKKOTTAI vs. ITO, PUDUKKOTTAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2252/CHNY/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCITFor Respondent: 04.04.2017
Section 10Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 244ASection 244A(2)

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

M/S CIGFIL LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 336/CHNY/2023[2014-15(24Q-Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2023

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Das1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.328/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-2) & 2.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.329/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-3) & 3.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.330/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-4) & 4.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.331/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-2) & 5.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.332/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-3) & 6.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.333/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-4) & 7.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.334/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-1) & 8.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.335/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-2) &

Section 234E

condonation of delay. Considering assessee’s submissions, Ld. CIT(A) held as under: - 4.1.1 The appeal is filed beyond prescribed time, with almost 7 years delay and liable to be rejected on that basis itself. However, it is being decided on merits.” ITA No.328 to 351/Chny/2023 No other findings have been rendered in the impugned order on delay. Upon perusal

M/S CIGFIL LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 346/CHNY/2023[2015-16(26Q-Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2023

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Das1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.328/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-2) & 2.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.329/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-3) & 3.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.330/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-4) & 4.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.331/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-2) & 5.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.332/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-3) & 6.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.333/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-4) & 7.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.334/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-1) & 8.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.335/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-2) &

Section 234E

condonation of delay. Considering assessee’s submissions, Ld. CIT(A) held as under: - 4.1.1 The appeal is filed beyond prescribed time, with almost 7 years delay and liable to be rejected on that basis itself. However, it is being decided on merits.” ITA No.328 to 351/Chny/2023 No other findings have been rendered in the impugned order on delay. Upon perusal

M/S CIGFIL LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 348/CHNY/2023[2015-16(26Q-Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2023

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Das1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.328/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-2) & 2.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.329/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-3) & 3.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.330/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-4) & 4.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.331/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-2) & 5.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.332/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-3) & 6.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.333/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-4) & 7.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.334/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-1) & 8.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.335/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-2) &

Section 234E

condonation of delay. Considering assessee’s submissions, Ld. CIT(A) held as under: - 4.1.1 The appeal is filed beyond prescribed time, with almost 7 years delay and liable to be rejected on that basis itself. However, it is being decided on merits.” ITA No.328 to 351/Chny/2023 No other findings have been rendered in the impugned order on delay. Upon perusal

M/S CIGFIL LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC,-TDS, , GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 328/CHNY/2023[2013-14 (24Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2023

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Das1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.328/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-2) & 2.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.329/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-3) & 3.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.330/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-4) & 4.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.331/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-2) & 5.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.332/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-3) & 6.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.333/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-4) & 7.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.334/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-1) & 8.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.335/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-2) &

Section 234E

condonation of delay. Considering assessee’s submissions, Ld. CIT(A) held as under: - 4.1.1 The appeal is filed beyond prescribed time, with almost 7 years delay and liable to be rejected on that basis itself. However, it is being decided on merits.” ITA No.328 to 351/Chny/2023 No other findings have been rendered in the impugned order on delay. Upon perusal

M/S CIGFIL LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 340/CHNY/2023[2014-15(26Q-Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2023

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Das1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.328/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-2) & 2.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.329/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-3) & 3.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.330/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-4) & 4.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.331/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-2) & 5.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.332/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-3) & 6.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.333/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-4) & 7.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.334/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-1) & 8.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.335/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-2) &

Section 234E

condonation of delay. Considering assessee’s submissions, Ld. CIT(A) held as under: - 4.1.1 The appeal is filed beyond prescribed time, with almost 7 years delay and liable to be rejected on that basis itself. However, it is being decided on merits.” ITA No.328 to 351/Chny/2023 No other findings have been rendered in the impugned order on delay. Upon perusal

M/S CIGFIL LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 343/CHNY/2023[2015-16(24Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2023

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Das1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.328/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-2) & 2.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.329/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-3) & 3.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.330/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-4) & 4.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.331/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-2) & 5.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.332/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-3) & 6.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.333/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-4) & 7.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.334/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-1) & 8.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.335/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-2) &

Section 234E

condonation of delay. Considering assessee’s submissions, Ld. CIT(A) held as under: - 4.1.1 The appeal is filed beyond prescribed time, with almost 7 years delay and liable to be rejected on that basis itself. However, it is being decided on merits.” ITA No.328 to 351/Chny/2023 No other findings have been rendered in the impugned order on delay. Upon perusal

M/S CIGFILLIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,CPC, GAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 335/CHNY/2023[2014-15(24Q-Q2]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2023

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Das1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.328/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-2) & 2.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.329/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-3) & 3.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.330/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-4) & 4.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.331/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-2) & 5.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.332/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-3) & 6.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.333/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-4) & 7.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.334/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-1) & 8.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.335/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-2) &

Section 234E

condonation of delay. Considering assessee’s submissions, Ld. CIT(A) held as under: - 4.1.1 The appeal is filed beyond prescribed time, with almost 7 years delay and liable to be rejected on that basis itself. However, it is being decided on merits.” ITA No.328 to 351/Chny/2023 No other findings have been rendered in the impugned order on delay. Upon perusal

M/S CIGFIL LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC,-TDS, , GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 329/CHNY/2023[2013-14(24Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2023

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Das1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.328/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-2) & 2.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.329/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-3) & 3.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.330/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-4) & 4.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.331/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-2) & 5.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.332/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-3) & 6.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.333/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-4) & 7.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.334/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-1) & 8.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.335/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-2) &

Section 234E

condonation of delay. Considering assessee’s submissions, Ld. CIT(A) held as under: - 4.1.1 The appeal is filed beyond prescribed time, with almost 7 years delay and liable to be rejected on that basis itself. However, it is being decided on merits.” ITA No.328 to 351/Chny/2023 No other findings have been rendered in the impugned order on delay. Upon perusal

M/S CIGFIL LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 337/CHNY/2023[2014-15(24Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2023

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Das1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.328/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-2) & 2.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.329/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-3) & 3.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.330/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-4) & 4.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.331/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-2) & 5.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.332/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-3) & 6.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.333/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-4) & 7.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.334/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-1) & 8.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.335/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-2) &

Section 234E

condonation of delay. Considering assessee’s submissions, Ld. CIT(A) held as under: - 4.1.1 The appeal is filed beyond prescribed time, with almost 7 years delay and liable to be rejected on that basis itself. However, it is being decided on merits.” ITA No.328 to 351/Chny/2023 No other findings have been rendered in the impugned order on delay. Upon perusal

M/S CIGFIL LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 345/CHNY/2023[2015-16(24Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2023

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Das1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.328/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-2) & 2.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.329/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-3) & 3.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.330/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (24Q-Q-4) & 4.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.331/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-2) & 5.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.332/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-3) & 6.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.333/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 (26Q-Q-4) & 7.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.334/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-1) & 8.आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.335/Chny/2023 (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 (24Q-Q-2) &

Section 234E

condonation of delay. Considering assessee’s submissions, Ld. CIT(A) held as under: - 4.1.1 The appeal is filed beyond prescribed time, with almost 7 years delay and liable to be rejected on that basis itself. However, it is being decided on merits.” ITA No.328 to 351/Chny/2023 No other findings have been rendered in the impugned order on delay. Upon perusal