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.

404 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 72clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai404Mumbai378Delhi302Kolkata259Bangalore185Ahmedabad159Karnataka130Hyderabad128Jaipur121Chandigarh102Pune95Visakhapatnam72Indore49Surat48Rajkot47Amritsar45Calcutta37Lucknow36Panaji33Cochin29Nagpur26Cuttack26Patna15SC14Raipur14Telangana11Guwahati8Dehradun8Jodhpur6Allahabad6Ranchi6Jabalpur5Varanasi4Agra2Orissa2Rajasthan2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)47Addition to Income47Condonation of Delay44Section 14842Limitation/Time-bar39Section 153A30Section 14729Section 13229Section 69A

POOJA PRABHAKAR,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 15(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3045/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Dec 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Mr. R. Venkataraman, CA &For Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69Section 69A

delay, was neither deliberate nor intentional but\noccurred due to bona fide reasons, and thus deserved to be condoned in the\ninterest of substantial justice.\n2. Without prejudice to the above, that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in not appreciating\nthat the assessment order dated 23.05.2023 passed by the National\nFaceless Assessment Centre [“Assessing Officer”] u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the\nAct

Showing 1–20 of 404 · Page 1 of 21

...
26
Disallowance24
Section 40A(3)23
Section 143(2)13

ACIT CIRCLE 1, TRICHY vs. DALMIA BHARAT LTD., TRICHY

In the result, appeal of the revenue being devoid of merits is dismissed

ITA 3156/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2014-15 Acit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S. M/S. Dalmia Dalmia Bharat Bharat Trichy Ltd.,Dalmiapuram, Tamilnadu - Ltd.,Dalmiapuram, Tamilnadu 621 651, Pan/Gir No.Aajcs 7366 K Aajcs 7366 K (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : N O N E Revenue By : Dr S.Palanikumar, Cit (Dr Dr) Date Of Hearing : 24 /2/ 2022 2 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/3/20 /2022 O R D E R Per C.M.Garg, Jm , Jm

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Dr S.Palanikumar, CIT (DR
Section 14A

condone the delay P a g e 1 | 17 Assessment Year : 2014-15 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. The sole grievance of the revenue in this appeal is that the ld CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to compute the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) after excluding investment

RANE ENGINE VALVE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 2815/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 4. The first common issue in these five appeals of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in making disallowance of professional fee paid to EVA Delith, Germany without deduction of TDS u/s.195 of the Act and thereby invoking the provisions of section

RANE ENGINE VALVE LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 885/CHNY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 4. The first common issue in these five appeals of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in making disallowance of professional fee paid to EVA Delith, Germany without deduction of TDS u/s.195 of the Act and thereby invoking the provisions of section

RANE ENGINE VALVES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 1498/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 4. The first common issue in these five appeals of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in making disallowance of professional fee paid to EVA Delith, Germany without deduction of TDS u/s.195 of the Act and thereby invoking the provisions of section

RANE ENGINE VALVE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 1477/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 4. The first common issue in these five appeals of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in making disallowance of professional fee paid to EVA Delith, Germany without deduction of TDS u/s.195 of the Act and thereby invoking the provisions of section

RANE ENGINE VALVES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 1497/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 4. The first common issue in these five appeals of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in making disallowance of professional fee paid to EVA Delith, Germany without deduction of TDS u/s.195 of the Act and thereby invoking the provisions of section

JAMAL MOHIDEEN HAROON IMRAN KHAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-1(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1962/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1962, 1963 & 1964/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Jamal Mohideen Haroon Imran Khan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 15/7, Vijayaragava Road First Street, Non Corporate Ward 1(2) T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Chennai. [Pan:Aaopi4540B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri Raghav Menon, Advocate & : Shri Gautam Venkatanarayanan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against Different Orders Dated 06.03.2025, 27.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Respectively.

For Respondent: Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT
Section 147Section 154Section 270A

section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. 4. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 72 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation

JAMAL MOHIDEEN HAROON IMRAN KHAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-1(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1963/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1962, 1963 & 1964/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Jamal Mohideen Haroon Imran Khan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 15/7, Vijayaragava Road First Street, Non Corporate Ward 1(2) T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Chennai. [Pan:Aaopi4540B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri Raghav Menon, Advocate & : Shri Gautam Venkatanarayanan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against Different Orders Dated 06.03.2025, 27.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Respectively.

For Respondent: Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT
Section 147Section 154Section 270A

section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. 4. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 72 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation

JAMAL MOHIDEEN HAROON IMRAN KHAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-1(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1964/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1962, 1963 & 1964/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Jamal Mohideen Haroon Imran Khan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 15/7, Vijayaragava Road First Street, Non Corporate Ward 1(2) T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Chennai. [Pan:Aaopi4540B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri Raghav Menon, Advocate & : Shri Gautam Venkatanarayanan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against Different Orders Dated 06.03.2025, 27.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Respectively.

For Respondent: Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT
Section 147Section 154Section 270A

section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. 4. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 72 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation

MADURAI AGRI BUSINESS INCUBATION FORUM ,COIMBATORE vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

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

ITA 875/CHNY/2023[-]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Mar 2024

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 10Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)Section 80G(5)(iv)

72 taxmann.com 251. In this case, while considering the issue whether the CIT(E) has power to condone the delay in filing application for grant of approval under section

S.MUTHUSAMY(HUF),NAMAKKAL vs. TDS, CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as

ITA 543/CHNY/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. P.Sajit Kumar, JCITFor Respondent: 30.06.2022
Section 200ASection 234E

section 200A by Finance Act, 2015, w.e.f 01.06.2015. The learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on the ground that the assessee failed to adduce any reasons which comes under reasonable cause for condoning delay in filing appeal. The learned CIT(A) further stated that unless the assessee explains reasons for not filing appeal within time

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, COIMBATORE vs. KOVAI MEDIA P. LTD., COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and cross

ITA 1562/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jun 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. G.Johnson, Addl.CIT
Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

72,80,664/- under section 68 of the IT Act,1961. 6. The Hon’ble ITAT is requested to cancel the order of the learned CIT(A)-1, Coimbatore and uphold the order of the Assessing Officer on the issue of addition to the made u/s 68 of the IT Act.” 3. At the outset, learned AR for the assessee

KATHIR KAMAN JEWELS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 19/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.17, 18, 19 & 20/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Kathir Kaman Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of New No. 40 (Old No. 23), Sarojini Income Tax, Street, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Central Circle 3(1) Chennai. [Pan:Aacck4534C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate & Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.N. Bipin, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders All Dated 17.10.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 20, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. Since Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri C.N. Bipin, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 5. The assessee raised 12 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 made by the Assessing Officer towards undisclosed income by concluding the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Income

KATHIR KAMAN JEWELS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 20/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.17, 18, 19 & 20/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Kathir Kaman Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of New No. 40 (Old No. 23), Sarojini Income Tax, Street, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Central Circle 3(1) Chennai. [Pan:Aacck4534C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate & Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.N. Bipin, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders All Dated 17.10.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 20, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. Since Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri C.N. Bipin, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 5. The assessee raised 12 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 made by the Assessing Officer towards undisclosed income by concluding the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Income

KATHIR KAMAN JEWELS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 17/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.17, 18, 19 & 20/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Kathir Kaman Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of New No. 40 (Old No. 23), Sarojini Income Tax, Street, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Central Circle 3(1) Chennai. [Pan:Aacck4534C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate & Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.N. Bipin, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders All Dated 17.10.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 20, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. Since Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri C.N. Bipin, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 5. The assessee raised 12 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 made by the Assessing Officer towards undisclosed income by concluding the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Income

KATHIR KAMAN JEWELS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 18/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.17, 18, 19 & 20/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Kathir Kaman Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of New No. 40 (Old No. 23), Sarojini Income Tax, Street, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Central Circle 3(1) Chennai. [Pan:Aacck4534C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate & Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.N. Bipin, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders All Dated 17.10.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 20, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. Since Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri C.N. Bipin, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 5. The assessee raised 12 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 made by the Assessing Officer towards undisclosed income by concluding the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Income

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

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

ITA 1753/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

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.

For Appellant: Shri Hithesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139

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

V.C. MEDICAL, EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,PALANI vs. ITO, WARD-1,, DINDIGUL

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

ITA 1114/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1114/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 V.C. Medical, Educational & Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Charitable Trust, 72-B, Dindugal Ward 1, Road, Palani 624 601. Dindigul. [Pan:Aaatv4282H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10.01.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-3, Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 21 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 T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 154

72-B, Dindugal Ward 1, Road, Palani 624 601. Dindigul. [PAN:AAATV4282H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 03.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.07.2025 आदेश

AA531 KESARIMANGALAM PRIMARY AGRL CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,ERODE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(5), ERODE

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

ITA 1872/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1872/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Aa531 Kesarimangalam Primary Income Tax Officer, Agri Co-Op Credit Society Limited, V. Ward -2(5), Kuppichipalayam, Erode. Kesarimangalam (P.O), Bhavani – 638 311. [Pan: Aacaa-6388-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : None ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(c)

72 days in appeal filed by the assessee, for which petition for condonation of delay along with reasons for delay has been filed. After :-2-: ITA. No: 1872/Chny/2024 considering the petition filed by the assessee and also hearing both the parties, we find that there is a reasonable cause for the assessee in not filing appeal on or before