D.SENTHIL KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

253) wherein the Hon'ble Court has clearly answered that a mere defect in the notice vitiates the penalty. The primary burden lies on the Revenue. The penalty proceedings translates into action only through notice issued u/s 271(1)(c) read with section 274 of Income Tax Act. The penalty proceedings must stand on its own. Therefore, the assessee must

DAKSHINAMOORTHY KUMARESAN,THIRUVARUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVARUR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

u/s 147 of the Act dated 25.05.2023, the Id.\nAssessing Officer stated that penalty proceedings u/s.271 (1) (c) of the Act is\ninitiated separately as it is evidenced that the assessee has 'concealed his\nparticulars of income' by not filing his return of income voluntarily for A.Y. 2016-\n2017 as required u/s.139(1) of the Act.\n7. Penalty is imposed

R V R NAGESH LEGAL HEIR OF LATE VENGATTARAYALU RAJAN,KANCHIPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORP WARD - 22(4), TAMBARAM, TAMBARAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

253) wherein the Hon'ble Court\nhas answered the issue of reference as follows: - Answers: Question No. 1: If the\nassessment order clearly records satisfaction for imposing penalty on one or the\nother, or both grounds mentioned in Section 271(1)(c), does a mere defect in the\nnotice—not striking off the irrelevant matter—vitiate the penalty proceedings

M.ARUN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CC-2(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.573/Chny/2021 िनधा)रण वष) /Assessment Year: 2008-09

u/s 274 r.w.s 271 on 31.12.2010 is a vague notice in a printed form without striking- off irrelevant portion and do not specify the exact charge for each head of addition for which the assessee was being penalized and therefore, it was a clear case of non-application of mind while initiating penalty against the assessee. Even in the body

PANJURAJAN GANESAN,,SIVAKASI vs. DCIT, CC - 2,, MADURAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकरअपील सं./Ita Nos.278/Chny/2020 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Panjurajan Ganesan Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.74A, Velayutham Road, Corporate Circle-2, Sivakasi, Madurai. Tamil Nadu-626 123. [Pan:Abypg3315R] (अपीलार्थी/Assessee) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. D. Anand, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. G. Latchana, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03.07.2025

253) as well as the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Babuji Jacob Vs. lTO (430 lTR 259; 08.12.2020) to take the same view. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Babuji Jacob Vs. lTO (supra), considering various decisions holding the field, held that since the notice under Section 271

SRI MAHARANI FINANCE CORPORATON,THIRUCHENGODE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1264/Chny/2023 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1261/Chny/2023 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1262/Chny/2023 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Sri Maharani Finance Corporation Dcit बनाम/ 24A, Velur Road, Central Circle, Vs. Tiruchengode-637 211. Salem. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahfs-0488-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj (Ca)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-05-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-06-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: 1. Aggrieved By Confirmation Of Certain Penalty In Captioned Assessment Years, The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us. First, We Take Up Ita No.1264/Chny/2023 For Ay 2016-17 Which Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, Chennai

3. The penalty proceedings were initiated on 22-03-2022 and a notice was issued u/s 274 read with Section 271(1)(c), a copy of which is on record. The same read as under: - …..Whereas in the course of proceedings before me for the Assessment Year 2016-17, it appears to me that you have concealed the particulars

SRI MAHARANI FINANCE CORPORATION ,THIRUCHENGODE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1264/Chny/2023 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1261/Chny/2023 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1262/Chny/2023 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Sri Maharani Finance Corporation Dcit बनाम/ 24A, Velur Road, Central Circle, Vs. Tiruchengode-637 211. Salem. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahfs-0488-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj (Ca)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-05-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-06-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: 1. Aggrieved By Confirmation Of Certain Penalty In Captioned Assessment Years, The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us. First, We Take Up Ita No.1264/Chny/2023 For Ay 2016-17 Which Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, Chennai

3. The penalty proceedings were initiated on 22-03-2022 and a notice was issued u/s 274 read with Section 271(1)(c), a copy of which is on record. The same read as under: - …..Whereas in the course of proceedings before me for the Assessment Year 2016-17, it appears to me that you have concealed the particulars

SRI MAHARANI FINANCE CORPORATION,THIRUCHENGODE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1264/Chny/2023 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1261/Chny/2023 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1262/Chny/2023 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Sri Maharani Finance Corporation Dcit बनाम/ 24A, Velur Road, Central Circle, Vs. Tiruchengode-637 211. Salem. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahfs-0488-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj (Ca)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-05-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-06-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: 1. Aggrieved By Confirmation Of Certain Penalty In Captioned Assessment Years, The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us. First, We Take Up Ita No.1264/Chny/2023 For Ay 2016-17 Which Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, Chennai

3. The penalty proceedings were initiated on 22-03-2022 and a notice was issued u/s 274 read with Section 271(1)(c), a copy of which is on record. The same read as under: - …..Whereas in the course of proceedings before me for the Assessment Year 2016-17, it appears to me that you have concealed the particulars

AMPA PALANIAPPAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NON CORP CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1370/Chny/2023 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1371/Chny/2023 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Ampa Palaniappan Acit बनाम/ Non-Corporate Circle-2(1) 48/19, Raman Street, T. Nagar Vs. Chennai. Chennai-600 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aippp-3546-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) -Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Mukundan (Jcit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-06-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-07-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

253) as well as the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Babuji Jacob Vs. lTO (430 lTR 259; 08.12.2020) to take the same view. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Babuji Jacob Vs. lTO (supra), considering various decisions holding the field, held that since the notice under Section 271

AMPA PALANIAPPAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1370/Chny/2023 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1371/Chny/2023 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Ampa Palaniappan Acit बनाम/ Non-Corporate Circle-2(1) 48/19, Raman Street, T. Nagar Vs. Chennai. Chennai-600 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aippp-3546-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) -Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Mukundan (Jcit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-06-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-07-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

253) as well as the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Babuji Jacob Vs. lTO (430 lTR 259; 08.12.2020) to take the same view. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Babuji Jacob Vs. lTO (supra), considering various decisions holding the field, held that since the notice under Section 271

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

271, 271A and 272A - Commissioners (Appeals) to have the same powers as Appellate Assistant Commissioners in regard to imposition of penalty. Section 245 - Commissioners (Appeals) authorised to set off refund against tax remaining payable. Section 245A - Inclusion of Commissioner (Appeals) as an income-tax authority for purposes of Chapter XIXA relating to settlement of cases. AGT Electronics Ltd. :- 8 -: Sections

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

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh

271, 271A and 272A - Commissioners (Appeals) to have the same powers as Appellate Assistant Commissioners in regard to imposition of penalty. Section 245 - Commissioners (Appeals) authorised to set off refund against tax remaining payable. Section 245A - Inclusion of Commissioner (Appeals) as an income-tax authority for purposes of Chapter XIXA relating to settlement of cases. Sections 247 to 251 - Provisions