VEEDIYARASAMPALAYAM POWERLOOM WEAVERS CO-OP PRODUCTION AND SALES SOCIETY LTD.,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, TDS WARD,, SALEM

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

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Amitabh Shukla

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ITA No.3018 to 3020/CHNY/2024 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Years are 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. 2. There is a delay of 86 days in filing each of the appeals. The assessee has filed petitions for condonation of delay accompanied by affidavit of the administrator of the assessee society

CHARSUR ARTS FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS,, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Jagadishआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita No.:1753/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Charsur Arts Foundation, The Commissioner Of No. 72, M.C.P. Ramasamy Road, Vs. Income Tax (Exemption), Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. Chennai. [Pan: Aabtc-1154-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Hithesh, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R Per George George K: This Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai Dated 16.05.2025 Passed Under Section 119(2)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Solitary Issue Argued On Merits Is With Regard To Maintainability Of Appeal Filed Against The Order Passed Under Section 119(2)(B) Of The Act.

condonation of delay under section 119(2)(b) of the Act. 6. We note that the appeal filed by the assessee is not maintainable before the Tribunal for the reason that an assessee is not vested with any right to assail an order passed under section 119(2)(b) of the Act by preferring an appeal before the Income

SRI KUMAWAT SAMAJ TRUST,CHENNAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS,, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.627/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Sri Kumawat Samaj Trust, Vs. The Commissioner Of No. 14, 1St Floor, Kumarappa Street, Income Tax (Exemptions), Sevenwells, Chennai 600 001. Chennai. [Pan:Aavts7941K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Naresh Singh Rathore, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, 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 29.12.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Under Section 119(2)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

condonation of delay under section 1119(2)(b) of the Act. 6. We note that the appeal filed by the assessee is not maintainable before the Tribunal for the reason that an assessee is not vested with any right to assail an order passed under section 119(2)(b) of the Act by preferring an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal

ELUMALAI RAJESHKUMAR,VILLUPURAM vs. ITO, WARD-1,, VILLUPURAM

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

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

condone the delay subject to payment of ₹10,000/- for each appeal to the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court within three (3) months of receipt of this order; and produce necessary proof of depositing of the same before the First Appellate Authority. In light of discussion, we set aside the impugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT

ELUMALAI RAJEHSKUMAR,VILLUPURAM vs. ITO, WARD-1,, VILLUPURAM

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

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

condone the delay subject to payment of ₹10,000/- for each appeal to the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court within three (3) months of receipt of this order; and produce necessary proof of depositing of the same before the First Appellate Authority. In light of discussion, we set aside the impugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT

ELUMALAI RAJESHKUMAR,VILLUPURAM vs. ITO, WARD-1,, VILLUPURAM

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

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

condone the delay subject to payment of ₹10,000/- for each appeal to the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court within three (3) months of receipt of this order; and produce necessary proof of depositing of the same before the First Appellate Authority. In light of discussion, we set aside the impugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT

NEOMAX PROMOTERS PVT. LTD.,MADURAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-2,, MADURAI

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

Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned, and the matter was restored

TIRUPUR ARUNACHALA GOUNDER RADHAMBIKAI KUPPUSAMY,TIRUPUR vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.363/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) T A G Radhambikai Kuppusamy, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.5, Mp Nagar Extension, Che –C (68) (1) Suriya Prabha Garden, Chennai. Tirupur 641 607

250 of the Act before the CIT(A) with a delay of 239 days. 5. As per Section 249(2) of the Act appeal shall be presented within 30 days to the CIT(A) which can be condoned by the CIT(A) u/s 249(3) of the Act, if he satisfies that the appellant on sufficient cause for not presenting

MUDHIYOR BALARKUDUMBA GRAMA PANNAI,VELLORE vs. EXEMPTIONS WARD 1, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.592/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23)

250 of CIT(A) with a delay of 215 days. 4. As per Section 249(2) of the Act appeal shall be presented within 30 days to the CIT(A) which can be condoned by the CIT(A) u/s 249(3) of the Act if he satisfies that the appellant on sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within

NEETHIVANAN JEYASUDHA,CHENNAI vs. ADDL JCIT (A), JODHPUR

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.449/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Neethivanan Jeyasudha, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, New No.P3, Old No.P13, Non Corporate Ward 19(4) 19Th Street, Anna Nagar, Chennai. Chennai 600 040. [Pan: Aplpj5195D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. Varadarajan, Cma ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Mukundan, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

250 of CIT(A) with a delay of 7 months. 5. As per Section 249(2) of the Act appeal shall be presented within 30 days to the CIT(A) which can be condoned by the CIT(A) u/s 249(3) of the Act if he satisfies that the appellant on sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within

TNSPL 88 KEELAERAL PRIMARY AGRICULTURE CO-OP SOCIETY,TUTICORIN vs. ITO WARD 2, TUTICORIN

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

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 724/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2023-24 M/S. Tnspl 88 Keelaeral The Income Tax Officer, Primary Agriculture Co-Op Vs. Ward 2, Society, Tuticorin. Keelaeral Village, Keelaeral Post, Ettayapuram Taluk, Tuticorin – 628 908. Pan: Aacat 5739L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Pryati Sharma, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.06.2025

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2023-24. 2. There is a delay of 11 days in filing the appeal. The assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay. On perusal of the same, we find there is sufficient reason for delay in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. Hence

MANOHARAN,TIRUVARUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), TRICHY

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.869 & 870/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 V. Shri Manoharan, The Assistant Commissioner Of No.9, Then Vadal South Street, Income Tax, Mannargudi, Circle 2(1), Thiruvarur District – 614 001. Trichy.

condone the delay in filing of appeals before the Ld.CIT(A). Therefore, we set aside the impugned orders of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeals back to his file with a direction to adjudicate the grounds of appeals raised by the assessee as provided for under sub-section (6) to Section 250

MANOHARAN,THIRUVARU vs. ITO, CIRCLE-2(1), TIRUCHIRAPPALLI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.869 & 870/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 V. Shri Manoharan, The Assistant Commissioner Of No.9, Then Vadal South Street, Income Tax, Mannargudi, Circle 2(1), Thiruvarur District – 614 001. Trichy.

condone the delay in filing of appeals before the Ld.CIT(A). Therefore, we set aside the impugned orders of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeals back to his file with a direction to adjudicate the grounds of appeals raised by the assessee as provided for under sub-section (6) to Section 250

Y-201 THICKANAMCODE PACCS LTD.,KANYAKUMARI vs. ITO, WARD-1, NAGERCOIL

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

condone the delay of `180′ days in filing of the appeal before the\nLd.CIT(A) and since, the Ld.CIT(A) has not passed the order as per\nprovisions of sub-section (6) of section 250

K1434 SENJERIMALAIYADIPALAYAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OPCREDIT SOCIETY,COIMBATORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORP WARD 4(1), COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

condoned the delay (subject to payment of cost), that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed the ex parte orders against the assessee for both years, since the assessee didn’t respond to his notices issued for hearing on three (3) occasions (for AY 2017-18) and finding no reply from the assessee, has dismissed the appeal. Likewise

K1434 SENJERIMALAIYADIPALAYAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OPCREDIT SOCIETY,COIMBATORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORP WARD 4(1), COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

condoned the delay (subject to payment of cost), that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed the ex parte orders against the assessee for both years, since the assessee didn’t respond to his notices issued for hearing on three (3) occasions (for AY 2017-18) and finding no reply from the assessee, has dismissed the appeal. Likewise

VISSA USHASRI,WEST BENGAL vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-191), SALEM

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

condone the delay in filing of appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeal back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a direction to decide the grounds of appeal as per sub-section (6) of Section 250

MR. ABDUL MUNAF IRFANUDEEN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

6) of section 210, he shall first\nestimate his current income and income-tax thereon shall be\ncalculated at the rates in force in the financial year; (b) where the\ncalculation is made by the Assessing Officer for the purpose of\nmaking an order under sub-section (3) of section 210, the total\nincome of the latest previous year