THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

reassessment, the assessment order is not sustainable and relied upon the judgment cited as CIT vs. Kabul Chawla - 380 ITR 173 (Del.). 10. Assessee brought on record copy of computation of income along with acknowledgement of return for income, copy of special audit report furnished u/s.142(2A) and reply filed by the assessee to the special audit report, available

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

reassessment, the assessment order is not sustainable and relied upon the judgment cited as CIT vs. Kabul Chawla - 380 ITR 173 (Del.). 10. Assessee brought on record copy of computation of income along with acknowledgement of return for income, copy of special audit report furnished u/s.142(2A) and reply filed by the assessee to the special audit report, available

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

reassessment, the assessment order is not sustainable and relied upon the judgment cited as CIT vs. Kabul Chawla - 380 ITR 173 (Del.). 10. Assessee brought on record copy of computation of income along with acknowledgement of return for income, copy of special audit report furnished u/s.142(2A) and reply filed by the assessee to the special audit report, available

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

reassessment, the assessment order is not sustainable and relied upon the judgment cited as CIT vs. Kabul Chawla - 380 ITR 173 (Del.). 10. Assessee brought on record copy of computation of income along with acknowledgement of return for income, copy of special audit report furnished u/s.142(2A) and reply filed by the assessee to the special audit report, available

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

reassessment, the assessment order is not sustainable and\nrelied upon the judgment cited as CIT vs. Kabul Chawla - 380 ITR 173 (Del.).\n10. Assessee brought on record copy of computation of income along with\nacknowledgement of return for income, copy of special audit report furnished\nu/s.142(2A) and reply filed by the assessee to the special audit report, available

ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU, CHENNAI

reassessment order arising therefrom would be a case of\nnullity and an order being void ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee

ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU, CHENNAI

reassessment order arising therefrom would be a case of\nnullity and an order being void ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee

ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU, CHENNAI

reassessment order arising therefrom would be a case of\nnullity and an order being void ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee

ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU, CHENNAI

reassessment order arising therefrom would be a case of\nnullity and an order being void ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee

DCIT LTU 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assesse and Revenue are dealt as under:-

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 & 93 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Insurance Company Limited, Large Tax Payer Unit, Vishranthi Melaram Towers, Chennai. No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.491, 492, 493, 494, 495 & 496 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Large Tax Payer Unit, Insurance Company Limited, Chennai. Vishranthi Melaram Towers, No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.Sanjay For Ms V.Pushpa, Sr.Standing Counsel For It Dept. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.10.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.01.2025

reassessment order arising therefrom would be a case of nullity and an order being void ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view that the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed. We therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and allow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee

DCIT LTU 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assesse and Revenue are dealt as under:-

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 & 93 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Insurance Company Limited, Large Tax Payer Unit, Vishranthi Melaram Towers, Chennai. No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.491, 492, 493, 494, 495 & 496 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Large Tax Payer Unit, Insurance Company Limited, Chennai. Vishranthi Melaram Towers, No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.Sanjay For Ms V.Pushpa, Sr.Standing Counsel For It Dept. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.10.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.01.2025

reassessment order arising therefrom would be a case of nullity and an order being void ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view that the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed. We therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and allow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee

ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assesse and Revenue are dealt as under:-

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 & 93 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Insurance Company Limited, Large Tax Payer Unit, Vishranthi Melaram Towers, Chennai. No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.491, 492, 493, 494, 495 & 496 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Large Tax Payer Unit, Insurance Company Limited, Chennai. Vishranthi Melaram Towers, No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.Sanjay For Ms V.Pushpa, Sr.Standing Counsel For It Dept. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.10.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.01.2025

reassessment order arising therefrom would be a case of nullity and an order being void ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view that the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed. We therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and allow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee

DCIT LTU 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

reassessment order arising therefrom would be a case of\nnullity and an order being void ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee

DCIT LTU 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

reassessment order arising therefrom would be a case of\nnullity and an order being void ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee

DCIT LTU 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

reassessment order arising therefrom would be a case of\nnullity and an order being void ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee

DCIT LTU 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

reassessment order arising therefrom would be a case of\nnullity and an order being void ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee

M/S. GOLDEN SHELTERS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP. CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2989 & 2991/Chny/2024 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13

Section 147 of the Act, argued that the AO is not empowered to assess or reassess income which relates to matters already subject to an appellate order. Since the issue of Honorarium was a subject matter of the original assessment and appellate proceedings, the AO could not have made an addition on the same issue in the reassessment proceedings

M/S. GOLDEN SHELTERS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2989 & 2991/Chny/2024 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13

Section 147 of the Act, argued that the AO is not empowered to assess or reassess income which relates to matters already subject to an appellate order. Since the issue of Honorarium was a subject matter of the original assessment and appellate proceedings, the AO could not have made an addition on the same issue in the reassessment proceedings