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.

26 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 276clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka103Mumbai56Delhi56Ahmedabad52Bangalore44Kolkata42Chennai26Rajkot23Jaipur10Chandigarh10Pune8Hyderabad6Indore6Guwahati5Amritsar4SC3Visakhapatnam3Cochin2Lucknow2Andhra Pradesh1Jodhpur1Cuttack1Himachal Pradesh1Patna1Rajasthan1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 153C42Section 234E20Section 153A14Addition to Income14Section 200A10Deduction10Section 1479Section 143(3)9Section 35

MOHAMED HUSSAIN MAHAMED HARISAI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-5(5), CHENNAI

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

ITA 655/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.654 & 655/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Mohamed Hussain Mohamed Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Harissi, 10, Nethaji Nagar, Iind Street Non Corporate Ward 5(5), Tondiarpet, Chennai 600 081. Chennai 600 006. [Pan:Apepm2204H] (Petitioner By) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Petitioner By : Shri N. Arjunraj, Ca For Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 10, Chennai Both Dated 01.03.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2010- 11 & 2011-12. 2. Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Time Barred By 277 Days Delay In Filing The Appeals Before The Tribunal. By Filing Condonation Petition In Support Of An Affidavit, The Assessee Has Explained As Under:

For Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250(6)

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2

9
TDS8
Business Income7
Section 1486
Section 69A

276 days caused due to above factors beyond my control and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. The ld. DR has not seriously object to the above submissions of the assessee. In view of the above submissions, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause for delay in filing the appeals before

MOHAMED HUSSAIN MAHAMED HARISAI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-5(5), CHENNAI

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

ITA 654/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.654 & 655/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Mohamed Hussain Mohamed Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Harissi, 10, Nethaji Nagar, Iind Street Non Corporate Ward 5(5), Tondiarpet, Chennai 600 081. Chennai 600 006. [Pan:Apepm2204H] (Petitioner By) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Petitioner By : Shri N. Arjunraj, Ca For Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 10, Chennai Both Dated 01.03.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2010- 11 & 2011-12. 2. Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Time Barred By 277 Days Delay In Filing The Appeals Before The Tribunal. By Filing Condonation Petition In Support Of An Affidavit, The Assessee Has Explained As Under:

For Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69A

276 days caused due to above factors beyond my control and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. The ld. DR has not seriously object to the above submissions of the assessee. In view of the above submissions, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause for delay in filing the appeals before

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal f

ITA 2600/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.R. VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.R. Clement Ramesh
Section 2Section 35

delay and therefore, the same is condoned and we proceed to decide the appeal on merits. condoned and we proceed to decide the appeal on merits. 4. The sole grievance of the Revenue in this appeal is against the The sole grievance of the Revenue in this appeal is against the The sole grievance of the Revenue in this appeal

K1340KALIKULAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY ,SANARPALAYAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ERODE

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

ITA 2797/CHNY/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Respondent: Mr. Ashwin D. Gowda
Section 143Section 250(6)Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

276 days. The assessee’s contention regarding condoning the delay has been considered and in this regard, we note that the assessee-society is a Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society registered under the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 and consists mainly of members who are farmers and who in turn elect office- bearers, who runs the society; and since

P. VENKATA SUBBA RAO,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NCC - 18,, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1823/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1823/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri P. Venkata Subba Rao, The Assistant Commissioner Of 3-C, Nu-Tech Srinivas, 52, Vs. Income Tax, Gangadheeswarar Koil Street, Non Corporate Circle 18, Purasawakkam, Chennai 600 084. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Abaps3474R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri P.V. Dilip Kumar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.09.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.10.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai, Dated 30.01.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2009-10. Besides Challenging The Issue On Merits, The Assessee Has Mainly Challenged The Ex-Parte Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A).

For Appellant: Shri P.V. Dilip Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

section 148 of the Act was issued on 11.03.2015 and duly served on the assessee. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the peak balance in the bank statement was worked out at ₹.8,44,500/- and brought to tax. On appeal, since the assessee could not e-file the appeal, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed

K.HEMALATHA,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CRCLE-13(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1940/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1940/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 K. Hemalatha, The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Sarath Fuel, 100 Feet Road, Vs. Income Tax, Velachery, Chennai 600 042. Non Corporate Circle 13(1), [Pan:Aayph0681C] Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R.S. Balaji, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.10.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20.10.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 7, Chennai, Dated 30.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. In The Grounds Of Appeal, Besides Challenging Various Disallowances Made In The Assessment Order, The Assessee Has Mainly Challenged The Ex-Parte Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) On The Ground That The Assessee Could Not E-File The Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250(1)

condonation of delay of 36 months and 3 days. We have also perused the copy of the petition under section 154 of the Act filed on 07.05.2019 before the ld. CIT(A). However, no order under section 154 of the Act was found to have been passed by the ld. CIT(A). Thus, to comply with the provision of Rule

RAMAN VARADHARAJAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD 18(4), CHENNAI

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

ITA 219/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.219/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Raman Varadharajan, The Income Tax Officer, No. 5, 3Rd Floor, Door No. 13, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward -18(4), Srinivasan Street, Mandaveli, Chennai. Chennai - 600 028. [Pan: Aafpv4099K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. S. Sriniranjani, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.07.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Ms. S. Sriniranjani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

section 143(3) of the Act was completed by assessing income of the assessee at ₹. 85,62,935/- by making various additions. 3. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Since the assessee could not e-file the appeal, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 4. On being aggrieved

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TUTICORIN vs. VVD & SONS (P) LIMITED, TUTICORIN

In the result, both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2153/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2153, 2154 2155 & 2156/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 & C.O. Nos. 132 & 133/Chny/2018 [In Ita Nos. 2153 & 2154/Chny/2018] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vvd & Sons (P) Limited, Income Tax, No. 182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [Pan:Aaacv8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit For : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 23.04.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Delayed By Three Days For Which, The Revenue Has Filed Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, To Which 2

Section 40A(3)

delay of 11 days in filing the COs stands condoned and admits the Cross Objections for adjudication. 4. The Revenue has raised following grounds for the AY 2013-14: 1. The order of the ld.CIT(A) is contrary to the provisions of the Income Tax Act, Rules and facts of the case. 2. The CIT(A) has deleted the additions

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TUTICORIN vs. VVD & SONS (P) LIMITED, TUTICORIN

In the result, both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2156/CHNY/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2153, 2154 2155 & 2156/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 & C.O. Nos. 132 & 133/Chny/2018 [In Ita Nos. 2153 & 2154/Chny/2018] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vvd & Sons (P) Limited, Income Tax, No. 182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [Pan:Aaacv8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit For : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 23.04.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Delayed By Three Days For Which, The Revenue Has Filed Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, To Which 2

Section 40A(3)

delay of 11 days in filing the COs stands condoned and admits the Cross Objections for adjudication. 4. The Revenue has raised following grounds for the AY 2013-14: 1. The order of the ld.CIT(A) is contrary to the provisions of the Income Tax Act, Rules and facts of the case. 2. The CIT(A) has deleted the additions

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TUTICORIN vs. VVD & SONS (P) LIMITED, TUTICORIN

In the result, both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2154/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2153, 2154 2155 & 2156/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 & C.O. Nos. 132 & 133/Chny/2018 [In Ita Nos. 2153 & 2154/Chny/2018] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vvd & Sons (P) Limited, Income Tax, No. 182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [Pan:Aaacv8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit For : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 23.04.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Delayed By Three Days For Which, The Revenue Has Filed Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, To Which 2

Section 40A(3)

delay of 11 days in filing the COs stands condoned and admits the Cross Objections for adjudication. 4. The Revenue has raised following grounds for the AY 2013-14: 1. The order of the ld.CIT(A) is contrary to the provisions of the Income Tax Act, Rules and facts of the case. 2. The CIT(A) has deleted the additions

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TUTICORIN vs. VVD & SONS (P) LIMITED, TUTICORIN

In the result, both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2155/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2153, 2154 2155 & 2156/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 & C.O. Nos. 132 & 133/Chny/2018 [In Ita Nos. 2153 & 2154/Chny/2018] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vvd & Sons (P) Limited, Income Tax, No. 182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [Pan:Aaacv8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit For : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 23.04.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Delayed By Three Days For Which, The Revenue Has Filed Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, To Which 2

Section 40A(3)

delay of 11 days in filing the COs stands condoned and admits the Cross Objections for adjudication. 4. The Revenue has raised following grounds for the AY 2013-14: 1. The order of the ld.CIT(A) is contrary to the provisions of the Income Tax Act, Rules and facts of the case. 2. The CIT(A) has deleted the additions

AVA SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. CIT(A), DELHI

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

ITA 499/CHNY/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Ms. Hemalatha, Addl. CITFor Respondent: 12.05.2022
Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 220Section 234E

276, for Assessment Years 2013-14 by invoking the provisions of section 234E of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The NFAC failed to appreciate that the charging section of levy of late fee u/s 234E is a statutory provision effective from the year 2012 but there was no machinery provision u/s 200A of the Act which empowered

AVA SOFTWARE PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. CIT(A), CHENNAI

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

ITA 497/CHNY/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Ms. Hemalatha, Addl. CITFor Respondent: 12.05.2022
Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 220Section 234E

276, for Assessment Years 2013-14 by invoking the provisions of section 234E of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The NFAC failed to appreciate that the charging section of levy of late fee u/s 234E is a statutory provision effective from the year 2012 but there was no machinery provision u/s 200A of the Act which empowered

SWELECT ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 557/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.557/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Swelect Energy System Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 5, Numeric House, Vs. Income Tax, Sir P.S. Sivasami Salai, Corporate Circle -6(2), Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. Chennai. [Pan: Aaacn2366F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, C.A. For Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sailendra Mamidi, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Chennai, Dated 26.12.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. Besides Challenging The Issue On Merit, The Assessee Has Mainly Challenged The Ex-Parte Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A).

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, C.A. for Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sailendra Mamidi, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 14A r.w. Rule 8D of ₹.18,82,08,132/-. 3. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Since the assessee could not e-file the appeal, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel

ANNAPURANIHARIHARAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD 15(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 558/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.558/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Smt. Annapurani Hariharan, The Income Tax Officer, 2A, Nineth South Cross Street, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward -15(1), Kapaleeswar Nagar, Neelangarai, Chennai. Chennai - 600 115. [Pan: Aexpa2734E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri P.G. Sadguru Das, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Chennai, Dated 31.12.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. Besides Challenging The Issue On Merit, The Assessee Has Mainly Challenged The Ex-Parte Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A).

For Appellant: Shri P.G. Sadguru Das, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)

section 143(3) of the Act was completed by assessing income of the assessee at ₹. 74,38,930/- by making various additions. 3. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Since the assessee could not e-file the appeal, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 4. On being aggrieved

D.A.V. EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-2, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is allowed

ITA 1670/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Exemption Ward 4, Street, Adambakkam, Chennai. Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

condoned the said delay in filing Form 10A vide his order dated 30.11.2016 and referred to page 82 of the paper book. He vehemently argued that the Assessing Officer, considering all the details, accepted the returned income and formed an opinion that the assessee was eligible for claiming exemption under section 11 of the Act during scrutiny assessment. He further

PALLAVA RESORTS PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 5 (1),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in I

ITA 700/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No.:700/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year 2011 – 2012

For Appellant: Mr. S. Sundraraman, CAFor Respondent: Mr. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(22)(e)

condone the delay of 96 days and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. The Assessee has raised two issues, i.e. (i) challenging the reopening of the assessment u/s.147 r.w.s.148 of the Act vide Ground Nos.2 to 6, as under: “2) He erred in re-opening the assessment of the Appellant u/s.147 of the Act, beyond a period

SITHANATHAN KALYANA MAHALL,DINDIGUL vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, MADURAI, MADURAI

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

ITA 1622/CHNY/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1620, 1621, 1622 & 1623/Chny/2023 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Sithanathan Kalyana Mahall, The Asst. Commissioner Of 47, Aruljothi Street, Adivaram, Vs. Income Tax, Palani, Dindigul – 624 601. Central Circle-1, [Pan: Aapfs 7171M] Madurai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sheila Parthasarthy, CIT
Section 153ASection 153C

delay is hereby condoned. 3. The facts in all the appeals of both the assessees are identical and issues are common hence, we proceed to pass a common order. For brevity, we shall take up the appeals in ITA Nos.1620 & 1624/Chny/2024 for A.Y 2016-17 as lead cases. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in ITA No.1620/Chny/2024

SITHAATHAN KALYANA MAHALL,DINDIGUL vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MADURAI, MADURAI

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

ITA 1621/CHNY/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1620, 1621, 1622 & 1623/Chny/2023 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Sithanathan Kalyana Mahall, The Asst. Commissioner Of 47, Aruljothi Street, Adivaram, Vs. Income Tax, Palani, Dindigul – 624 601. Central Circle-1, [Pan: Aapfs 7171M] Madurai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sheila Parthasarthy, CIT
Section 153ASection 153C

delay is hereby condoned. 3. The facts in all the appeals of both the assessees are identical and issues are common hence, we proceed to pass a common order. For brevity, we shall take up the appeals in ITA Nos.1620 & 1624/Chny/2024 for A.Y 2016-17 as lead cases. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in ITA No.1620/Chny/2024

SRI ANGALA ESWARI THIRUMANA MAHAL,DINDIGUL vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 MADURAI, MADURAI

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

ITA 1627/CHNY/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1620, 1621, 1622 & 1623/Chny/2023 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Sithanathan Kalyana Mahall, The Asst. Commissioner Of 47, Aruljothi Street, Adivaram, Vs. Income Tax, Palani, Dindigul – 624 601. Central Circle-1, [Pan: Aapfs 7171M] Madurai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sheila Parthasarthy, CIT
Section 153ASection 153C

delay is hereby condoned. 3. The facts in all the appeals of both the assessees are identical and issues are common hence, we proceed to pass a common order. For brevity, we shall take up the appeals in ITA Nos.1620 & 1624/Chny/2024 for A.Y 2016-17 as lead cases. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in ITA No.1620/Chny/2024