M/S. ANISH KUMAR EDUCATION TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 92CD (c) an order made under section 154 or section 155 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund or an order refusing to allow the claim made by the assessee under either of the said sections [except an order referred to in sub-section (12) of section 144BA

ANISH KUMAR WIFE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 11 (1),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 92CD (c) an order made under section 154 or section 155 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund or an order refusing to allow the claim made by the assessee under either of the said sections [except an order referred to in sub-section (12) of section 144BA

ANISH KUMAR MARRIAGE TRUST,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCC - 11 (1),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 92CD (c) an order made under section 154 or section 155 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund or an order refusing to allow the claim made by the assessee under either of the said sections [except an order referred to in sub-section (12) of section 144BA

M/S. ANISHKUMAR MALE CHILD TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 92CD (c) an order made under section 154 or section 155 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund or an order refusing to allow the claim made by the assessee under either of the said sections [except an order referred to in sub-section (12) of section 144BA

M/S. ANISH KUMAR FEMALE CHILD TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 92CD (c) an order made under section 154 or section 155 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund or an order refusing to allow the claim made by the assessee under either of the said sections [except an order referred to in sub-section (12) of section 144BA

M/S. ANISHKUMAR MALE CHILD TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 92CD (c) an order made under section 154 or section 155 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund or an order refusing to allow the claim made by the assessee under either of the said sections [except an order referred to in sub-section (12) of section 144BA

M/S. ANISH KUMAR EDUCATION TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 92CD (c) an order made under section 154 or section 155 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund or an order refusing to allow the claim made by the assessee under either of the said sections [except an order referred to in sub-section (12) of section 144BA

ANISH KUMAR WIFE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 11 (1),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 92CD (c) an order made under section 154 or section 155 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund or an order refusing to allow the claim made by the assessee under either of the said sections [except an order referred to in sub-section (12) of section 144BA

M/S. ARCHANA FEMALE CHILD TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 11 (1),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 92CD (c) an order made under section 154 or section 155 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund or an order refusing to allow the claim made by the assessee under either of the said sections [except an order referred to in sub-section (12) of section 144BA

M/S. ANISH KUMAR FEMALE CHILD TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 92CD (c) an order made under section 154 or section 155 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund or an order refusing to allow the claim made by the assessee under either of the said sections [except an order referred to in sub-section (12) of section 144BA

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-2,, COIMBATORE vs. M/S. DHANDAYUTHAPANI FOUNDRY PVT. LTD.,, COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.698/Chny/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs M/S. Dhandayuthapani Foundry Corporate Circle-2 Pvt.Ltd. Coimbatore. Door No.1/4, Vetrivel Layout Opp. To Dpf Electricals, Vilankurichi Post Vilankurichi Road, Coimbatore-641 035. Pan: Aaacd 6151G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 275(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. The learned CIT(Appeals), Coimbatore-1 has erred to appreciate the fact that in the instant case, the penalty order has been passed on 29.03.2017, which is within one year from the date of receipt of order from the Id. CIT(A). 5. From these and other grounds that

SRI KRISHA TRADERS,SIVAGANGAI vs. DCIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2223/Chny/2025 िनधा%रण वष% /Assessment Year: 2017-18

275/-". The assessee made detailed submissions before the A.O justifying the cash deposits stating that the assessee is in the business of buying used tyres and selling re- buttoned tyres, where the payments towards sales are made by the customers in cash. The assessee also submitted that sales and purchase register in support of the claim. After perusing the details

DCIT, COIMBATORE vs. R.ELANGOVAN, KARAMADAI

In the result, Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1199/Chny/2017 & C.O.No.75/Chny/2017 (In Ita No.1199/Chny/2017) "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-2014. The Deputy Commissioner Vs. Shri. R. Elangovan, Of Income Tax, 821/2, Kallipalayam, Corporate Circle 1, Chikkarampalayam Post, Coimbatore Karamadai 641 104. [Pan Aadpe 1841Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

275 of the Act shall, so far as may be, apply. Sub Section (1) of Section 274 of the Act mandates that order imposing penalty has to be imposed only after hearing the assessee or giving a assessee opportunity of hearing. Opportunity that is to be given to the assessee should be a meaningful one and not a farce. Notice

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Ble

Reassessment • cannot be made Wherein it was held that assessing officer had allowed a deduction after making inquiries and considering the reply of the assessee, then the subsequent withdrawal of the same under Section 148 amounts to change of opinion which is invalid In this connection the Ld.AR placed reliance on below judicial precedents - The Hon’ble Bombay High Court

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. M/S CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT & FINANCE COMPANY LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Ble

Reassessment • cannot be made Wherein it was held that assessing officer had allowed a deduction after making inquiries and considering the reply of the assessee, then the subsequent withdrawal of the same under Section 148 amounts to change of opinion which is invalid In this connection the Ld.AR placed reliance on below judicial precedents - The Hon’ble Bombay High Court

K.R.JAYARAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

section 147. 11. A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in A. N. Lakshman Shenoy v. ITO [1958] 34 ITR 275 (SC), speaking through S. K. Das J held that an assessment cannot be reopened on the basis of a mere guess, gossip or rumour. This was in the context of the pre-1948 law relating to reassessment

CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FIANANCE CO. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

Reassessment\ncannot be made\nWherein it was held that assessing officer had allowed a deduction\nafter making inquiries and considering the reply of the assessee,\nthen the subsequent withdrawal of the same under Section 148\namounts to change of opinion which is invalid In this connection the\nLd.AR placed reliance on below judicial precedents\nThe Hon'ble Bombay High Court

THAVAPRIYA,TIRUPPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), TIRUPPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:70/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Thavapriya, Ito, Ward 2(1), 4/412, Aathal Thottam Road, Vs. Tirupur. Bharathi Nagar, Veerapandi Post, Tiruppur. [Pan:Awfpt-9644-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S.Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) By Virtual ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am:

Reassessment Order, violating the effect of Section 275 of the Act. And, for other reasons and grounds that may be adduced