THE GATE OF HOPE CHARITABLE TRUST,,CHENNAI vs. ITO(E), WARD-2,, CHENNAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

2) of the Act, therefore originally, no scrutiny assessment was framed. Therefore, the originally, no scrutiny assessment was framed. Therefore, the originally, no scrutiny assessment was framed. Therefore, the return of income income income filed filed filed by by by assessee assessee assessee stood stood stood accepted accepted accepted by by by the the the Department. Department. Department. Subsequently

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

2, any order which does not fall within the ambit of that sub-section, may still be subject matter of appeal under the omnibus provision “an order against the assessee denies his liability” under clause 1 of the main section. 10. In fact the Circular goes further to state that a pre- assessment order is also appealable under Section

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

2, any order which does not fall within the ambit of that sub-section, may still be subject matter of appeal under the omnibus provision “an order against the assessee denies his liability” under clause 1 of the main section. 10. In fact the Circular goes further to state that a pre- assessment order is also appealable under Section

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

2, any order which does not fall within the ambit of that sub-section, may still be subject matter of appeal under the omnibus provision “an order against the assessee denies his liability” under clause 1 of the main section. 10. In fact the Circular goes further to state that a pre- assessment order is also appealable under Section

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

2, any order which does not fall within the ambit of that sub-section, may still be subject matter of appeal under the omnibus provision “an order against the assessee denies his liability” under clause 1 of the main section. 10. In fact the Circular goes further to state that a pre- assessment order is also appealable under Section

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

2, any order which does not fall within the ambit of that sub-section, may still be subject matter of appeal under the omnibus provision “an order against the assessee denies his liability” under clause 1 of the main section. 10. In fact the Circular goes further to state that a pre- assessment order is also appealable under Section

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

2, any order which does not fall within the ambit of that sub-section, may still be subject matter of appeal under the omnibus provision “an order against the assessee denies his liability” under clause 1 of the main section. 10. In fact the Circular goes further to state that a pre- assessment order is also appealable under Section

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

2, any order which does not fall within the ambit of that sub-section, may still be subject matter of appeal under the omnibus provision “an order against the assessee denies his liability” under clause 1 of the main section. 10. In fact the Circular goes further to state that a pre- assessment order is also appealable under Section

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

2, any order which does not fall within the ambit of that sub-section, may still be subject matter of appeal under the omnibus provision “an order against the assessee denies his liability” under clause 1 of the main section. 10. In fact the Circular goes further to state that a pre- assessment order is also appealable under Section

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

2, any order which does not fall within the ambit of that sub-section, may still be subject matter of appeal under the omnibus provision “an order against the assessee denies his liability” under clause 1 of the main section. 10. In fact the Circular goes further to state that a pre- assessment order is also appealable under Section

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

2, any order which does not fall within the ambit of that sub-section, may still be subject matter of appeal under the omnibus provision “an order against the assessee denies his liability” under clause 1 of the main section. 10. In fact the Circular goes further to state that a pre- assessment order is also appealable under Section

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

2, any order which does not fall within the ambit of that sub-section, may still be subject matter of appeal under the omnibus provision “an order against the assessee denies his liability” under clause 1 of the main section. 10. In fact the Circular goes further to state that a pre- assessment order is also appealable under Section

NATARAJAN,CUDDALORE vs. ITO,ITWARD-1(1) , CHENNAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriand Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.123/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-2012 Shri Natarajan The Income Tax Officer, 353, Pudupettai Main Road, Vs. International Taxation, Indira Nagar, C. Puthupettai, Ward 2(1), Parangipettai Post, Chennai 600 006 Cuddalore 608 502. Pan: Anfpn 9506Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. J. Saravanan, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Samuel Pitta, Irs, Jcit.

iii) Pr.Commisioner of Income Tax-II Lucknow v. Mohd. Rizwan Prop. M/s.M.R.Garments Moulviganj [ITA No.100 of 2015 dated 30.03.2017], in which, it was held as under: 34. Section 148 clearly talks of issue of notice by A.O. Meaning thereby, A.O. having jurisdiction over Assessee. In fact, it is his satisfaction which is to be recorded for justifying reopening of assessment

SRI K.SRIKANTH,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

14 years represented Guardian Mrs.Vidyaa Srikanth, ITA No.307/Chny/2010 & ITA Nos.1015 & 1016/Chny/2012 & :- 10 -: (iii) Sri. Krishnammachari Srikkanth son of C.R. Krishnammachari, the assessee, (iv) Smt. Vidyaa Srikkanth, wife of K Krishnammachari Srikkanth, the shareholders of KRIS SRIKKANTH SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED, (Formerly known as A.A.International Private Limited). And M/s. ABN FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, No. 13, Rani Annadurai Street, Raja Annamalaipuram

SHRI K.SRIKANTH,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

14 years represented Guardian Mrs.Vidyaa Srikanth, ITA No.307/Chny/2010 & ITA Nos.1015 & 1016/Chny/2012 & :- 10 -: (iii) Sri. Krishnammachari Srikkanth son of C.R. Krishnammachari, the assessee, (iv) Smt. Vidyaa Srikkanth, wife of K Krishnammachari Srikkanth, the shareholders of KRIS SRIKKANTH SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED, (Formerly known as A.A.International Private Limited). And M/s. ABN FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, No. 13, Rani Annadurai Street, Raja Annamalaipuram

SRI K.SRIKANTH,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

14 years represented Guardian Mrs.Vidyaa Srikanth, ITA No.307/Chny/2010 & ITA Nos.1015 & 1016/Chny/2012 & :- 10 -: (iii) Sri. Krishnammachari Srikkanth son of C.R. Krishnammachari, the assessee, (iv) Smt. Vidyaa Srikkanth, wife of K Krishnammachari Srikkanth, the shareholders of KRIS SRIKKANTH SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED, (Formerly known as A.A.International Private Limited). And M/s. ABN FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, No. 13, Rani Annadurai Street, Raja Annamalaipuram

ACIT,, CHENNAI vs. SRI. K.SRIKANTH,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

14 years represented Guardian Mrs.Vidyaa Srikanth, ITA No.307/Chny/2010 & ITA Nos.1015 & 1016/Chny/2012 & :- 10 -: (iii) Sri. Krishnammachari Srikkanth son of C.R. Krishnammachari, the assessee, (iv) Smt. Vidyaa Srikkanth, wife of K Krishnammachari Srikkanth, the shareholders of KRIS SRIKKANTH SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED, (Formerly known as A.A.International Private Limited). And M/s. ABN FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, No. 13, Rani Annadurai Street, Raja Annamalaipuram

ACIT NON CORP CIRCLE 1 (1) FORMERLY KNOWN AS BUSINESS CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S DEOLITE HASKINS & SELLS, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

reassess such income. Proviso to section 147 of course requires that where the assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after the expiry of the four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped