D.A.V. EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-4,, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Street, Adambakkam, Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 4, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit 28.10.2025 21.01.2026 : प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : आदेश/Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Id. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The

1 (1.1 & 1.2) is general in nature and requires no adjudication. 21. Ground No. 2 (2.1 to 2.5) raised by the assessee in challenging the action of the Id. CIT(A) in not considering the submissions of the assessee in respect of validity of reassessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, in the facts and circumstances

AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

u/s 143(3) of the Act, the assessments cannot be reopened after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless there is a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for that assessment year. In other words, if the AO wants to re-open the assessment after four

M/S AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

u/s 143(3) of the Act, the assessments cannot be reopened after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless there is a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for that assessment year. In other words, if the AO wants to re-open the assessment after four

M/S AVM CHARITIES ,CHENNAI vs. ITO,EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

u/s 143(3) of the Act, the assessments cannot be reopened after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless there is a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for that assessment year. In other words, if the AO wants to re-open the assessment after four

M/S AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

u/s 143(3) of the Act, the assessments cannot be reopened after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless there is a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for that assessment year. In other words, if the AO wants to re-open the assessment after four

M/S. A V M CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

u/s 143(3) of the Act, the assessments cannot be reopened after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless there is a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for that assessment year. In other words, if the AO wants to re-open the assessment after four

AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

u/s 143(3) of the Act, the assessments cannot be reopened after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless there is a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for that assessment year. In other words, if the AO wants to re-open the assessment after four

M/S AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

u/s 143(3) of the Act, the assessments cannot be reopened after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless there is a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for that assessment year. In other words, if the AO wants to re-open the assessment after four

M/S ALPHA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice-आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.588/Chny/2022 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S. Alpha Educational Trust Vs The Dcit (Exemptions), No.2/310, Jeeva Street, Chennai. Mondiamman Nagar, Red Hills, Chennai-600 052. Pan: Aacta 9230A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

1) dated 31.05.2022. The assessment was completed by the DDIT (Exemptions)-II, Chennai, for the relevant assessment year 2011-12 u/s.143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter “the Act”) vide order dated 24.03.2014. 2. The first jurisdictional issue raised by the assessee is with regard to reassessment and assumption of jurisdiction u/s.147

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

u/s 147 of the Act. 5.2 In the present case, the assessee has not shown bank account with Axis Bank, Adyar Branch, Chennai. As per Explanation 2 of Section147, it is very clear that due to non- disclosure of this by the assessee, the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The assessee has not produced anything before the Commissioner

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

u/s 147 of the Act. 5.2 In the present case, the assessee has not shown bank account with Axis Bank, Adyar Branch, Chennai. As per Explanation 2 of Section147, it is very clear that due to non- disclosure of this by the assessee, the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The assessee has not produced anything before the Commissioner

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

u/s 147 of the Act. 5.2 In the present case, the assessee has not shown bank account with Axis Bank, Adyar Branch, Chennai. As per Explanation 2 of Section147, it is very clear that due to non- disclosure of this by the assessee, the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The assessee has not produced anything before the Commissioner

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

u/s 147 of the Act. 5.2 In the present case, the assessee has not shown bank account with Axis Bank, Adyar Branch, Chennai. As per Explanation 2 of Section147, it is very clear that due to non- disclosure of this by the assessee, the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The assessee has not produced anything before the Commissioner

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

u/s 147 of the Act. 5.2 In the present case, the assessee has not shown bank account with Axis Bank, Adyar Branch, Chennai. As per Explanation 2 of Section147, it is very clear that due to non- disclosure of this by the assessee, the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The assessee has not produced anything before the Commissioner

PONDICHERRY AGRO FOODS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORARE WARD-5(2),, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1753/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Pondicherry Agro Foods P Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.1B, 1St Floor, Arihant Jashn, Vs. Corporate Ward -5(2), Rukmani Lakshmipathy Salai, Chennai. 38 (Old 121), Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Pan: Aaacp 4418N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Anandd Babunath, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit

1) (ii) of the Act is not tenable and erroneously upheld the addition as per the assessment order completed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the IT Act, 1961 dated 20.12.2016. 5. That the Ld. AO further reiterated the sworn statement of the director of the Herbicure Healthcare Bio-Herbal Research Foundation (HHBHRF) which was never confronted to the Appellant

ADIT, CHENNAI vs. S A A ISPAHANI TRUST, CHENNAI

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

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

147 of the Act was passed on 30.12.2009. In the said order the AO suo-moto examined the matter keeping in mind the directions of the ITAT for the A.Y.2001-02 and 2003-04 and reasoned that the details gathered for the A.Y.2002-03 do not indicate any violation u/s.13 of the Act. Thus, the income offered by the assessee was accepted

C.R.ANAND EDUCATIONAL TRUST,MADURAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, MADURAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2802/Chny/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10) C.R. Anand Educational Trust, V Ito, Exemption, Madurai. No. 34, Ganeshapuram, S K. Pudur, Madurai – 625 007. Pan No. : Aabtc1675J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Sankaralingam, Cit (Rtd) & Shri B. Gopalakrishnan, Advocate Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit Dr सुिवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/02/2022 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am:

147 of the Act, the assessee was not in a possession of registration u/s. 12AA of the Act. Accordingly, the AO has disallowed the exemption u/s. 11 & 12 of the IT Act and treated the assessee as an AOP and applied the rates applicable and assessed the income of Rs. 1,43,48,060/- and raised the payment of Rs.70

PKD TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, POLLACHI

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2053/Mds/2014 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1820 & 1819/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S Pkd Trust, The Income Tax Officer, Pkd Matriculation School, V. Ward I(2) / Ward 1(1), Coimbatore Road, Pollachi. Pollachi – 642 001. Pan : Aaaap 1297 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

u/s 10(23C) of the Act without assigning proper reasons and justification. (3) The CIT(Appeals) erred in sustaining the assessment of `1,01,81,782/- in the computation of taxable total income without assigning proper reasons and justification. (4) The CIT(Appeals) failed to appreciate that there was no proper opportunity given before the passing of the impugned order

P.K.D.TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, POLLACHI

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2053/Mds/2014 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1820 & 1819/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S Pkd Trust, The Income Tax Officer, Pkd Matriculation School, V. Ward I(2) / Ward 1(1), Coimbatore Road, Pollachi. Pollachi – 642 001. Pan : Aaaap 1297 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

u/s 10(23C) of the Act without assigning proper reasons and justification. (3) The CIT(Appeals) erred in sustaining the assessment of `1,01,81,782/- in the computation of taxable total income without assigning proper reasons and justification. (4) The CIT(Appeals) failed to appreciate that there was no proper opportunity given before the passing of the impugned order