SALEM STARCH AND SAGO MANUFACTURERS SERVICE INDUSTRIAL CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD.,SALEM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2,, SALEM

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

Bench: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member), SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)

264 r.w.s. 144B of the Act was passed on 31.03.2023, while the appeal was filed on 02.05.2023, which is beyond the statutory time limit provided for filing of the appeal. As per section 249(2)(c) of the Act, the appeal shall be presented within 30 days of the following date on which the intimation of the order sought

SADRAS VENKATARAMA CHETTY CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO ( EXEMPTIONS ) WARD - 2 , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 544/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2015-16 Sadras Venkatarama Chetty Charities, Vs. The Income Tax Officer No. 1, Audiappa Naicken Street, (Exemptions), Ward – 2, George Town, Chennai 600 001. Aayakar Bhavan, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aabas2781C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri J. Prabhakar, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.N. Dhandapani, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.10.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], New Delhi, Dated 18.05.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Facts Are, In Brief, That The Assessee Sadras Venkatarama Chetty Charities Filed The Return Of Income On 05.11.2015 In Itr-7 Declaring An Income Of Nil After Claiming Deduction Under Section 11 Of The Income

section 264 was not posted for hearing until 12.3.2019 and the same is getting barred by limitation under the said provision on or before 31.3.2019. The Honourable CIT heard the petition on 13.3.2019, 21.3.2019 and 22.3.2019 and a report of the Assessing Officer is awaited to dispose the revision petition. However, your appellant apprehends that

RATHINASAMY PUSHPAVENI,SALEM vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), SALEM

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

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1378/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rathinasamy Pushpaveni, The Income Tax Officer, Rohini Garden, Vs. Ward-1(1), Azhagapuram Pudur, Salem. Salem – 636 016. [Pan: Bxxpp-0274-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Arv Srinivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.04.2024

condone delay of 344 days, while it was filed ear after receipt of an order dated 10-O1-2023, passed by Principal Commissioner I Income- tax under section 264

SHRI C. THANGARAJ,,TIRUPUR vs. PCIT-3, , COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.382/Chny/2020 िनधा'रण वष'/Assessment Year: 2014-15 C. Thangaraj, Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of No. 1, Vaikkal Thottam, Palladam Income Tax - 3, Road, Tirupur 641 604. Coimbatore. [Pan:Abtpt5217E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (*+थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri A. Arjun Raj, C.A. By Virtual *+थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri N. Balakrishnan, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.11.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

264 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application for condoning delay and in support of it, an affidavit has also been filed, which states as under: The original assessment of Sri C. Thangaraj (PAN: ABTPT5217E) for the assessment year 2014-15 was passed on 22.12.2016 by Income Tax Officer 2(1) wherein

ITO WARD 1, KANCHIPURAM vs. RAJKUMAR, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2623/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Income Tax Officer, Vs Mr. Rajkumar, Ward-1 17, High Road, Thirumazhisai Kanchipuram. Chennai-602 107. Pan: Aehpr 1513A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay in filing of above appeal is condoned and appeal filed by the Revenue is admitted for adjudication. 4. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal:- “ 1.1 The Order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is contrary to theLaw and facts of the case. 1.2 Though the tax effect is less than the monetary limit fixed

M/S. MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NCC-4(1), CHENNAI

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.:447/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 Shri Mahendra Kumar Jain, The Asst. Commissioner Of No.56/B1, Pantheon Road, Vs. Income Tax, Egmore, Non-Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. Pan: Aanpm 2662B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Anandd Babunath, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.06.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.06.2025

264 of the IT Act, 1961 which was preferred with the genuine intent of seeking justice on the facts that the interest paid on the unsecured loans as per the books of account maintained by the Appellant in violation of principles of natural justice. 5. For that the Addl. / JCIT (Appeals), Thane, erred in ignoring the time period covered under

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. DCIT, VILLUPURAM CIRCLE,, VILLUPRUAM

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-II,, CUDDALORE

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. DCIT, VILLUPURAM CIRCLE,, VILLUPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

THE CUDDALORE DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD.,CUDDALORE vs. DCIT CUDDALORE CIRCLE, CUDDALORE

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-I,, CUDDALORE

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, CUDDALLORE vs. M/S VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD., VILLUPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERTATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. DCIT, VILLUPURAM CIRCLE,, VILLUPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) quashing the reopening initiated u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, according to CIT(A) the Revenue could not establish failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts required

A.G.T. ELECTRONICS LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. ADIT, CPC, , BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2767/Chny/2024 िनधा8रण वष8 /Assessment Year: 2018-19

delay for adjudication of the issues arising from the assessment order on merits. 4.1 After considering the submissions of the assessee, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee as not-maintainable, as the assessee has already taken recourse u/s.264 of the Act and once the assessee has opted alternative remedy, relying on the decision of Hon’ble Orissa High

P. KRISHNAMURTHY,VILLUPURAM vs. ITO,WARD-2, VILLUPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh

delay for adjudication of the issues arising from the assessment order on merits. 4.1 After considering the submissions of the assessee, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee as not-maintainable, as the assessee has already taken recourse u/s.264 of the Act and once the assessee has opted alternative remedy, relying on the decision of Hon’ble Orissa High

STAR PLASTICS,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAUI

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

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

delay is condoned and appeal is admitted. 3. The only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the reopening of assessment beyond four years despite the fact that original assessment was completed u/s.143(3) of the Act and there is no failure shown in the reasons recorded on the part of the assessee

SUNDARAM SANKAR ANAND,KARUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COIMBATORE

In the result the appeals of the assessee are disposed of as below:

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2850,2851,2852 & 2853/Chny/2024, 2910, 2911 & 2912/Chny/2024 धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sundaram Sankar Anand, The Assistant Commissioner Of No.63-B-7, Mayanur, Vs Income Tax, M Kaspa Sandai Peatai, . Central Circle – 2, Coimbatore. Krishnarayapuram Taluk, Karur – 639 102 [Pan:Bvips-1149-E] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. V. Alagappa, C.A. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Mr. M.Murali, Cit (Virtual) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am:

264 days; the appeals for AYs 2013-14 to 2015-16 have been filed with a delay of 252 days; and the appeals for AYs 2016-17 to 2018-19 have been filed with a delay of 261 days. The assessee has moved an application seeking condonation of delay, duly supported by an affidavit setting forth the reasons for such

SUNDARAM SANKAR ANAND,KARUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COIMBATORE

In the result the appeals of the assessee are disposed of as below:

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2850,2851,2852 & 2853/Chny/2024, 2910, 2911 & 2912/Chny/2024 धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sundaram Sankar Anand, The Assistant Commissioner Of No.63-B-7, Mayanur, Vs Income Tax, M Kaspa Sandai Peatai, . Central Circle – 2, Coimbatore. Krishnarayapuram Taluk, Karur – 639 102 [Pan:Bvips-1149-E] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. V. Alagappa, C.A. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Mr. M.Murali, Cit (Virtual) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am:

264 days; the appeals for AYs 2013-14 to 2015-16 have been filed with a delay of 252 days; and the appeals for AYs 2016-17 to 2018-19 have been filed with a delay of 261 days. The assessee has moved an application seeking condonation of delay, duly supported by an affidavit setting forth the reasons for such

SUNDARAM SANKAR ANAND,KARUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COIMBATORE

264 days; the appeals for AYs 2013-14 to 2015-16 have been filed\nwith a delay of 252 days; and the appeals for AYs 2016-17 to 2018-19 have\nbeen filed with a delay of 261 days. The assessee has moved an application\nseeking condonation of delay, duly supported by an affidavit setting forth the\nreasons for such