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.

38 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 69Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai153Kolkata91Delhi77Ahmedabad55Jaipur47Chennai38Hyderabad34Amritsar34Surat33Chandigarh23Visakhapatnam20Bangalore18Pune17Lucknow10Raipur8Indore7Cochin6Rajkot6Calcutta5Guwahati4Dehradun3Agra2SC2Jodhpur1Nagpur1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Condonation of Delay30Addition to Income29Section 14818Reopening of Assessment18Section 14717Section 14416Section 69C15Section 143(3)13Section 68

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. JAGATHRAKSKAN SRINISHA, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 1253/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1253, 1264 & 1271/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Central Circle -2(3), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Jagathrakshakan Srinisha, 1St Main Road, Adyar, Besant Nagar, Chennai - 600 020. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Abfps-1422-E] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca & Shri. Shrenik Chordia, Ca. राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri. C.N. Bipin, C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025 आदेश /Order Per S.R.Raghunatha, Am: The Present Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 06.02.2025 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19 (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld.Cit(A), Chennai, In Respect Of The Assessment Order Dated 01.03.2019 Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -2(3) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ao) For The Assessment Year 2017-18 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Impugned Assessment Year) U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act). :-2-:

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCA &For Respondent: Shri. C.N. Bipin, C.I.T
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154

Showing 1–20 of 38 · Page 1 of 2

12
Limitation/Time-bar12
Section 133A11
Survey u/s 133A11
Section 270A

condone the delay and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. Appeal in respect of the assessment order dated 01.03.2019 in ITA No.:1271/Chny/2025: 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is an individual and is the daughter of Shri. S.Jagathrakshakan. A search was conducted u/s.132 of the Act, in the premises of Shri.Jagathrakshakan

INCOMETAX OFFICER, THRIUVALLUR vs. GT60 ARUNGULAM PRIMARY AGRI COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY, TIRUTTANI

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

ITA 2781/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2781/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Gt60 Arungulam Primary Agri Ward 1, Cooperative Credit Society, Tiruvallur. No. 1, Periya Theru, Thumbikulam Village, Thalavedu Post & Taluk, Tiruvallur 631 212. [Pan: Aabag2568F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Malar Mannan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.07.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 24 Days. The Ito, Ward 1, Tiruvallur Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Malar Mannan, Advocate
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69ASection 69C

delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 3. The Appellant-Revenue raised 4 grounds of appeal amongst which, the only short point raised for our consideration as to whether the order of the ld. CIT(A) is justified in giving relief to the assessee considering the alleged additional evidence in the facts and circumstances of the case

SUNDARAM SANKAR ANAND,KARUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 2851/CHNY/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

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:

For Appellant: Shri. V. Alagappa, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. M.Murali, CIT (Virtual)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

delay in filing the aforesaid appeals stands condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. :-3-: ITA. Nos:2850 to 2853/Chny/2024, 2911 to 2913/Chny/2024 7. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, is engaged in the business of executing civil contracts and is also a partner in certain partnership firms. A search

SUNDARAM SANKAR ANAND,KARUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 2853/CHNY/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2025AY 2015-2016

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:

For Appellant: Shri. V. Alagappa, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. M.Murali, CIT (Virtual)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

delay in filing the aforesaid appeals stands condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. :-3-: ITA. Nos:2850 to 2853/Chny/2024, 2911 to 2913/Chny/2024 7. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, is engaged in the business of executing civil contracts and is also a partner in certain partnership firms. A search

SUNDARAM SANKAR ANAND,KARUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 2911/CHNY/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

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:

For Appellant: Shri. V. Alagappa, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. M.Murali, CIT (Virtual)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

delay in filing the aforesaid appeals stands condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. :-3-: ITA. Nos:2850 to 2853/Chny/2024, 2911 to 2913/Chny/2024 7. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, is engaged in the business of executing civil contracts and is also a partner in certain partnership firms. A search

SUNDARAM SANKAR ANAND,KARUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 2850/CHNY/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2025AY 2012-2013

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:

For Appellant: Shri. V. Alagappa, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. M.Murali, CIT (Virtual)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

delay in filing the aforesaid appeals stands condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. :-3-: ITA. Nos:2850 to 2853/Chny/2024, 2911 to 2913/Chny/2024 7. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, is engaged in the business of executing civil contracts and is also a partner in certain partnership firms. A search

SEERANGAN DEVARAJ,SALEM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 692/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Respondent: Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, JCIT
Section 144

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. & ITA Nos.620 & 621/CHNY/2024 Assessee’s Appeals in ITA Nos.689 to 694 & 696/CHNY/2024 3. The first common issue in all these seven appeals of two different assessees is as regards to reopening of assessment. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that, he is not pressing this ground raised

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SALEM vs. SEERANGAN DEVARAJ, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 620/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Respondent: Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, JCIT
Section 144

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. & ITA Nos.620 & 621/CHNY/2024 Assessee’s Appeals in ITA Nos.689 to 694 & 696/CHNY/2024 3. The first common issue in all these seven appeals of two different assessees is as regards to reopening of assessment. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that, he is not pressing this ground raised

SEERANGAN DEVARAJ,SALEM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 691/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Respondent: Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, JCIT
Section 144

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. & ITA Nos.620 & 621/CHNY/2024 Assessee’s Appeals in ITA Nos.689 to 694 & 696/CHNY/2024 3. The first common issue in all these seven appeals of two different assessees is as regards to reopening of assessment. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that, he is not pressing this ground raised

DEVARAJ ELLAMMAL,SALEM vs. ITO WARD 1(6), SALEM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 696/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Respondent: Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, JCIT
Section 144

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. & ITA Nos.620 & 621/CHNY/2024 Assessee’s Appeals in ITA Nos.689 to 694 & 696/CHNY/2024 3. The first common issue in all these seven appeals of two different assessees is as regards to reopening of assessment. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that, he is not pressing this ground raised

SEERANGAN DEVARAJ,SALEM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 690/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Respondent: Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, JCIT
Section 144

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. & ITA Nos.620 & 621/CHNY/2024 Assessee’s Appeals in ITA Nos.689 to 694 & 696/CHNY/2024 3. The first common issue in all these seven appeals of two different assessees is as regards to reopening of assessment. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that, he is not pressing this ground raised

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SALEM vs. SEERANGAN DEVARAJ, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 621/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Respondent: Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, JCIT
Section 144

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. & ITA Nos.620 & 621/CHNY/2024 Assessee’s Appeals in ITA Nos.689 to 694 & 696/CHNY/2024 3. The first common issue in all these seven appeals of two different assessees is as regards to reopening of assessment. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that, he is not pressing this ground raised

SEERANGAN DEVARAJ,SALEM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 694/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Respondent: Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, JCIT
Section 144

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. & ITA Nos.620 & 621/CHNY/2024 Assessee’s Appeals in ITA Nos.689 to 694 & 696/CHNY/2024 3. The first common issue in all these seven appeals of two different assessees is as regards to reopening of assessment. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that, he is not pressing this ground raised

SEERANGAN DEVARAJ,SALEM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 689/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Respondent: Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, JCIT
Section 144

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. & ITA Nos.620 & 621/CHNY/2024 Assessee’s Appeals in ITA Nos.689 to 694 & 696/CHNY/2024 3. The first common issue in all these seven appeals of two different assessees is as regards to reopening of assessment. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that, he is not pressing this ground raised

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), CHENNAI , CHENNAI vs. SHRI VIVEK PAPISETTY, CHENNAI

The appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 405/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.405/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Dcit Shri Vivek Papisetty बनाम Central Circle-2(4) No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, 6Th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai. / Vs. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Brcpp-6180-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 2. Cross Objection No.19/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.405/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) बनाम/ Shri Vivek Papisetty Dcit No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, Vs. Central Circle-1(4) 6Th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Brcpp-6180-N (अपीलाथ"/Cross Objector) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Revenue By : Shri V. Nandakumar (Cit)- Ld. Dr !"थ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri Y. Sridhar (Fca)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-01-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02-04-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench 1.1 Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (FCA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar (CIT)- Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

condone the delay and admit the cross-objections for adjudication on merits. 1.3 The grounds taken by the revenue read as under: 1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is erroneous on facts of the case and in law. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.5,49,45,783/- made towards cash

DCIT, COIMBATORE vs. SHRI R. BALACHANDIRAN, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2728/CHNY/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jul 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2728/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs Shri R. Balachandiran, The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.2/21, Govanur Central Circle – I, Naickenpalayam Post, Coimbatore – 641 018. Coimbatore – 641 020. Pan: Adapb8349N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M. Narayanan, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250(6)Section 69C

condone the delay of 2 days in filing the appeal by the Revenue and proceed to hear the case on merits. 3. The Revenue has raised several grounds in its appeal, however the crux of the issue is that the Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A) who had erred in deleting the addition made

MR. RANGAL SATHIS KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-3(3), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2949/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2949/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mr. Rangan Sathis Kumar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 6, 4Th Cross Street, Ellaiamman Non Corporate Ward 3(3), Colony Vellala, Teynampet, Chennai. Chennai 600 086. [Pan:Bmvps9901E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.01.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 06.06.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 81 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, We Find The Reasons Stated By The Assessee Are Bonafide, Which Really

For Appellant: Shri b. Ramakrishnan, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 69C

delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee raised 3 grounds in his appeal and mainly challenged the exparte order of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his original return of income on 10.02.2018 admitting total income

CRAFTSMAN AUTOMATION LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT,CC-2, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 177/CHNY/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.177/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Craftsman Automation Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of ‘Senthel Towers’, 4Th Floor, Income Tax, 1078, Avinashi Road, Corporate Circle 2, Coimbatore 641 018. Coimbatore 641 018. [Pan:Aabcc2461K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaragahavan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.03.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Coimbatore, Dated 30.03.2021 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2015-16 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaragahavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32(1)(iia)Section 69CSection 80J

delay in filing the appeal is condoned and admitted for adjudication. 2 I.T.A. No.177/Chny/21 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2015-16 on 06.01.2016 declaring total income of ₹. Nil after claiming Chapter VIA deduction under section 80JJAA amounting to ₹.5,81,82,038/- under normal provisions

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) , CIRCLE-, CUDDALORE vs. M. RAMESH JEWELLERS, TIRUKOYILURE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, and the cross- appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 587/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Gautam S. Mukundan, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69BSection 69C

condone delay in filing of appeal and admit appeal filed by the assessee for adjudication. ITA No.587/chny/2025 – Revenue’s Appeal : 3. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. “The order of the ld.CIT(A) is contrary to the facts and findings of the Assessing Officer, which were made in the assessment order. 2. The ld.CIT(A) erred

M RAMESH JEWELLERS,TIRUKOILUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VILLUPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, and the cross- appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1539/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Gautam S. Mukundan, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69BSection 69C

condone delay in filing of appeal and admit appeal filed by the assessee for adjudication. ITA No.587/chny/2025 – Revenue’s Appeal : 3. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. “The order of the ld.CIT(A) is contrary to the facts and findings of the Assessing Officer, which were made in the assessment order. 2. The ld.CIT(A) erred