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.

78 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 46Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi124Kolkata101Mumbai86Chennai78Amritsar62Hyderabad59Ahmedabad59Jaipur43Lucknow27Pune27Patna26Indore22Bangalore18Rajkot16Surat15Chandigarh12Cuttack11Visakhapatnam8Allahabad6Jodhpur5Guwahati5Agra4Calcutta4Cochin3Raipur2Jabalpur2Varanasi2Dehradun1

Key Topics

Addition to Income61Section 143(3)37Disallowance34Section 4028Section 14A25Section 54F21Condonation of Delay20Section 6819Section 153A

ITO, NCW - I (4),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. NITHYASUDHA COMBINES,, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 577/CHNY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.576 & 577/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & C.O. Nos. 06 & 07/Chny/2021 [In I.T.A. No. 576 & 577/Chny/2020] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Nithyasudha Combines, Non Corporate Ward 1(4), No. 8/20, Second Cross Street, Chennai – 600 034. Nandanam Extension, Nandanam, Chennai 600 085. [Pan: Aakfn6811A] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri R. Venkata Raman, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.05.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Chennai, Both Dated 16.12.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2015-16 Passed Against Deletion Of Quantum Addition Made Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] As Well As Deletion Of Penalty Levied Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Act. The First

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

Showing 1–20 of 78 · Page 1 of 4

18
Section 13217
Section 14815
TDS13

section 143(3) of the Act was served on the assessee on 29.12.2017. However, the assessee filed its appeal before the ld. CIT(A) belatedly on 24.11.2018, thereby, there is a delay of 300 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay explaining in detail the reasons

ITO, NCW - I (4),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. NITHYASUDHA COMBINES,, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 576/CHNY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.576 & 577/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & C.O. Nos. 06 & 07/Chny/2021 [In I.T.A. No. 576 & 577/Chny/2020] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Nithyasudha Combines, Non Corporate Ward 1(4), No. 8/20, Second Cross Street, Chennai – 600 034. Nandanam Extension, Nandanam, Chennai 600 085. [Pan: Aakfn6811A] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri R. Venkata Raman, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.05.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Chennai, Both Dated 16.12.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2015-16 Passed Against Deletion Of Quantum Addition Made Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] As Well As Deletion Of Penalty Levied Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Act. The First

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

section 143(3) of the Act was served on the assessee on 29.12.2017. However, the assessee filed its appeal before the ld. CIT(A) belatedly on 24.11.2018, thereby, there is a delay of 300 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay explaining in detail the reasons

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

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

ITA 2280/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

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)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

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

ITA 2281/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

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)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

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

ITA 2283/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

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)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

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

ITA 2282/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

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)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

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

VENKOBA MAHESH KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-9(2), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 275/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K., Vice- & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 275/Chny/2025 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Venkoba Mahesh Kumar, Income Tax Officer, Old No. 24, New No. 20, Vs. Corporate Ward - 9(2), Dr. Natesan Road, 3Rd Lane, Chennai. Triplicane, Chennai 600 005. [Pan: Aiipm-6975-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 18.03.2025 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

Section 68

delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee raised 10 grounds of appeal, amongst which, the only issue emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in confirming the addition of ₹.22,47,615/- being the value of credit card payments under section 68 of the Income

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. GOPINATH RAMAKRISHNAN, CHENNAI

In the result, both appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for

ITA 292/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.292/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner – V. Mr.Gopinath Ramakrishnan, Of Income Tax, D-309, Srishti Apartments, Non-Corporate Circle-15, 14, Sri Ramnagar, Chennai. First Cross, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai-600 041. [Pan: Aadpg 9081 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 254Section 54F

delay in filing of above appeals are condoned and appeals filed by the Revenue are admitted for adjudication. 3. The Revenue has, more or less, raised common grounds of appeal for both the assessment years. Therefore, for the sake of brevity, grounds of appeal filed in ITA No.292/Chny/2017 for the AY 2012-13, are re-produced as under: ITA Nos.292

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MADHU PARASURAM, CHENNAI

In the result, both appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for

ITA 293/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.292/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner – V. Mr.Gopinath Ramakrishnan, Of Income Tax, D-309, Srishti Apartments, Non-Corporate Circle-15, 14, Sri Ramnagar, Chennai. First Cross, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai-600 041. [Pan: Aadpg 9081 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 254Section 54F

delay in filing of above appeals are condoned and appeals filed by the Revenue are admitted for adjudication. 3. The Revenue has, more or less, raised common grounds of appeal for both the assessment years. Therefore, for the sake of brevity, grounds of appeal filed in ITA No.292/Chny/2017 for the AY 2012-13, are re-produced as under: ITA Nos.292

DCIT, PONDICHERRY vs. INTEGRA SOFTWARE SERVICES P. LTD., PONDICHERRY

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1099/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

Section 15CSection 194CSection 195Section 40

46A, since the details submitted before the CIT(A) for the amounts paid within threshold limits laid down by Section 194C which were not available in the records. 5. For the above and for any other reasons that may be adduced at the time of hearing the order of the CIT(A) may be cancelled and that

ABHAYA KASHMIRA,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE -1, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as

ITA 225/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 2542/Chny/2017 & Co No: 5/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Smt. Abhaya Kashmira, Tax, Vs. No. 6 & 7, Ramgiriextn., Non- Corporate Circle -1(1), Taramani, Velachery Link Road, Formerly Known As Business Circle -1, Chennai – 600 042. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aixpk 0809J]

For Appellant: Shri. J. Prabhakar, CAFor Respondent: Shri. K. Mohamed Mustafa, JCIT
Section 14ASection 24ASection 54

section 14A r.w.r. 8D(ii) & (iii), the AO disallowed Rs. 4,25,702/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). With regard to the addition of Rs. 76,62,674/-, the Ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report from the AO based on which she deleted this addition. However, confirmed the other two issues. 3. Aggrieved

ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. ABHAYA KASHMIRA, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as

ITA 2542/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 2542/Chny/2017 & Co No: 5/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Smt. Abhaya Kashmira, Tax, Vs. No. 6 & 7, Ramgiriextn., Non- Corporate Circle -1(1), Taramani, Velachery Link Road, Formerly Known As Business Circle -1, Chennai – 600 042. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aixpk 0809J]

For Appellant: Shri. J. Prabhakar, CAFor Respondent: Shri. K. Mohamed Mustafa, JCIT
Section 14ASection 24ASection 54

section 14A r.w.r. 8D(ii) & (iii), the AO disallowed Rs. 4,25,702/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). With regard to the addition of Rs. 76,62,674/-, the Ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report from the AO based on which she deleted this addition. However, confirmed the other two issues. 3. Aggrieved

DDIT, CHENNAI vs. THE MADRAS SEVA SADN, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose and C

ITA 974/CHNY/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri. G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

condonation of delay. In my ITA No.974/2014 & :- 5 -: CO No.30/2015. considered opinion that in cases where the reasons beyond the control of the assessee, delay occurred in filing the audit report, or for bonafide reasons, form 10 could not be filed on time, the exemption as available to such trust under section 11 and 12 may not be denied

N.PURUSHOTHAMAN,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is party allowed

ITA 393/CHNY/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Apr 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.76/Chny/2017 & C.O. No.34/Chny/2017 [In Ita No.76/Chny/2017] ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Mohan Reddy, CITFor Respondent: 11.04.2023
Section 37Section 40A(3)

delay of 37 days is condoned and appeal is admitted. 4. The common issue in these cross appeals, one by the Revenue and one by the assessee is as regards to order of the CIT(A) directing the Assessing Officer to restrict disallowance at Rs.25 lakhs being 7.5% of total development expenses claimed by the assessee at Rs.3

DCIT, OOTY vs. N.PURUSHOTHAMAN, COIMBATORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is party allowed

ITA 76/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.76/Chny/2017 & C.O. No.34/Chny/2017 [In Ita No.76/Chny/2017] ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Mohan Reddy, CITFor Respondent: 11.04.2023
Section 37Section 40A(3)

delay of 37 days is condoned and appeal is admitted. 4. The common issue in these cross appeals, one by the Revenue and one by the assessee is as regards to order of the CIT(A) directing the Assessing Officer to restrict disallowance at Rs.25 lakhs being 7.5% of total development expenses claimed by the assessee at Rs.3

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), CHENNAI vs. ARVIND SRINIVASAN, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1765/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 1765/Chny/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs Mr. Arvind Srinivasan Income Tax, Central Circle-3(4), 61, Oliver Road, Mylapore, Chennai-600 034. Chennai-600 004. Pan: Adcpa0371R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) ""यथ"/Respondent/

For Appellant: Mr. B.S.Purushotham, CAFor Respondent: 02.12.2020
Section 1Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 260ASection 40A(3)

46A of the IT Rules 1962. 3 3.4 Having regard to the fact that as per seized documents and as admitted by the assessee in his sworn statement, Rs.10,00.00,000/- was paid to MIs Kokilam Foundation and out of this payment of ` 10 crores. a sum of Rs.5 crores was made in cash in violation of the provisions

BOOPATHI MOULISWARAN,COIMBATORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

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

ITA 506/CHNY/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.506/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-2018) Boopathi Mouliswaran, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of 758, Dr. Radhakrishnan Road, Income, Tatabad, Non Corporate Circle 2, Coimbatore 641 012. Coimbatore. [Pan: Ahrpm 2004Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Shrenik Chardia, C.A., ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms Kavitha, Irs, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri Shrenik Chardia, C.AFor Respondent: Ms Kavitha, IRS, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. Brief facts of the case are as under:- The assessee is an individual and the proprietor of Sri Balaji Traders filed his return of income for the assessment year 2017-2018 on 24.03.2017 declaring a total income of Rs.14,46,700/-. The case of the assessee was selected for Scrutiny

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 1, CHENNAI vs. HITACHI SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , KANCHIPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed\nby the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1715/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND\nSHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nआयकर अपीलसं./IT(TP)A No.: 17/CHNY/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19\nHitachi Solutions India Private\nLimited,\nBlock 5, 10th Floor, 1/124,\nDLF IT Park, Shivaji Gardens,\nMount Poonamallee Road,\nChennai - 600 089.\nThe Deputy Commissioner of\nIncome Tax,\nVs. Corporate Circle- 1(1),\nNo.121, M.G.Road,\nChennai - 600 034.\n[PAN:AAACZ-1544-R]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)\nआयकर

For Appellant: Shri Darpan Kirpalani, Advocate by VirtualFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, C.I.T
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153(4)

condone delay in filing of appeal and admit appeal filed by the revenue\nfor adjudication.\n3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in\nIT(TP)A No.: 17/CHNY/2024:\n1.\nProcedural irregularity and violation of principles of natural justice.\n1. 1. The Learned Assessing Officer (\"Ld. AO\") has grievously erred, in law by\nmaking a reference

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. ASAIKANI NADAR KAMARAJ, RAJAPALAYAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as Cross

ITA 1197/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1197/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 & C.O. No. 54/Chny/2023 [In I.T.A. No. 1197/Chny/2023] The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Asaikani Nadar Kamaraj, Income Tax, 7/84, Pound Street, Chokkanathaputhur, Central Circle 2, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District, Madurai. Tamil Nadu 626 121. [Pan:Aaxpk1318E] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit Assessee By : Shri R. Venkataraman, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.03.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.03.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 31.08.2023 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017-18 On 01.11.2017 Admitting A Total

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkataraman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145Section 68

46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. 13.2 Coming to the sum of ₹.2,94,63,363/-, it is noticed that the assessee has duly offered the same to tax in the A.Y.2018-19 which was duly accepted by the Assessing Officer while completing the scrutiny assessment for the A.Y. 2018-19. Since the income admitted by the assessee was accepted

DR.K.N.THRUNAVUKARASU,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1584/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1584/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 Dr. K.N. Thirunavukarasu, The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 20, Kellys Road, Kilpauk, Vs. Income Tax, Chennai 600 010. Business Circle Xiv, [Pan: Aacpt4864F] Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Jharna B. Harilal, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Milind Madhukar Bhusari, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 04.04.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.06.2016 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Ms. Jharna B. Harilal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing and adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Doctor by profession and is running a nursing home in the name and style of K.N. Nursing Home and filed the return of income for the assessment year 2010-11 on 28.09.2010 admitting total income