EKAMBARAM ELUMALAI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-19(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment order u/s 147 was also invalid. Further, the notice issued by the jurisdictional AO was found to be in violation of Section 151A of the Act, deeming it invalid.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "147", "144B", "69A

ACIT, NUNAGAMBAKKAM vs. INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LIMITED, ANNA NAGAR

u/s 148 of the Act, which lacks\njurisdiction, as the prescribe authority, as specified u/s 151 of the\nAct did not approve the same.\n- : 60 -:\nITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025\nITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025\nIntegrated Service Point Ltd.\n3. Adjudication of disallowance_at_20% of alleged bogus\npurchases as against appellant's voluntary disallowance of 12% in\nROI u/s

INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-2(4), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the assessee's appeals in ITA Nos.1881, 1882,\nand 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys.2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are\nallowed

u/s 148 of the Act, which lacks\njurisdiction, as the prescribe authority, as specified u/s 151 of the\nAct did not approve the same.\n:- 59 -:\nITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025\nITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025\nIntegrated Service Point Ltd.\n3. Adjudication of disallowance_at_20% of alleged bogus\npurchases as against appellant's voluntary disallowance of 12% in\nROI u/s

SYED BATHRUDEEN MOHIDEEN AWLIYA,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-19(6), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1308/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Syed Bathrudeen Mohideen Income Tax Officer, Awliya, Non-Corp Ward-19(6), No.8/13-C Kamaraj Nagar, Chennai. 3Rd Street, Pallavaram, Chennai-600 043. [Pan: Axrpm7549Q] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Ms.S.Sonali & Mr.S.P.Chidambaram, Advocates. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.V.Supraja, Addl.Cit

section 69A of the Act. The Ld. Counsel argued that it is assailing the order of Ld.CIT(A) both on legal grounds as well as on the merits of the case. As the legal ground of the appellant assessee strikes at the very root of the reassessment order u/s. 147

POOJA PRABHAKAR,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 15(1), CHENNAI , CHENNAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for the A

u/s. 148 of the Act, though dated 31.03.2021, was digitally signed and issued on 01.04.2021, making it subject to the new reassessment regime under section 148A. Since the AO failed to follow the mandatory procedure under section 148A, the reassessment proceedings were quashed.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "147", "144", "148", "148A", "149", "151", "132", "143(1)", "69A

POOJA PRABHAKAR,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 15(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for the A

u/s 148 of the Act, though dated 31.03.2021, was digitally signed and issued on 01.04.2021, making it subject to the new reassessment provisions under Section 148A of the Act. Since these provisions were not followed, the reassessment proceedings were quashed.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "147", "144", "148", "148A", "149", "151", "115BBE", "69A

K V TEX FIRM,CHENNAI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHENNAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee stand allowed

reassessment. The phrase \"to the extent provided in Section 144B of\nthe Act' would mean that the restriction provided in Section 144B of the Act, such as\nkeeping the International Tax Jurisdiction or Central Circle Jurisdiction out of the ambit\nof Section 144B of the Act would also apply under the Scheme. Further the exceptions\nprovided in sub-section

K V TEX FIRM,CHENNAI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHENNAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee stand allowed

reassessment. The phrase \"to the extent provided in Section 144B of\nthe Act' would mean that the restriction provided in Section 144B of the Act, such as\nkeeping the International Tax Jurisdiction or Central Circle Jurisdiction out of the ambit\nof Section 144B of the Act would also apply under the Scheme. Further the exceptions\nprovided in sub-section

MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT(A), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

reassessment proceedings on the following counts: (i) Lack of jurisdiction in issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act; (ii) Improper service of notice u/s 148 on an incorrect email ID; and (iii) Absence of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the assessment order. However, since the detailed arguments were also addressed on merits by the parties, we first proceed

MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT(A), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

reassessment proceedings on the following counts: (i) Lack of jurisdiction in issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act; (ii) Improper service of notice u/s 148 on an incorrect email ID; and (iii) Absence of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the assessment order. However, since the detailed arguments were also addressed on merits by the parties, we first proceed

MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT(A), CHENNAI

69A of the Act, when the same are duly recorded and explained. Further,\nclerical or classification errors cannot give rise to additions when the substantive\nnature of the transaction is explained and accepted.\nIn view of the above, we direct for deletion of the addition of Rs.11,58,03,416/-\nsustained by the Id. CIT(A). This ground of appeal

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY , CHENNAI

69A of the Act, when the same are duly recorded and explained. Further,\nclerical or classification errors cannot give rise to additions when the substantive\nnature of the transaction is explained and accepted.\nIn view of the above, we direct for deletion of the addition of Rs.11,58,03,416/-\nsustained by the Id. CIT(A). This ground of appeal

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-10, CHENNAI vs. ARUNCHALAM VEERAIAH, CHENNAI

In the result, the revenue's appeal is dismissed and allow the cross objection\nof the assessee

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon'Ble Shri Jagadish\N\Nआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2320/Chny/2024\N& C.O.No.78/Chny/2024\N(In Ita No.2320/Chny/2024)\N(निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2011-2012)\N\Nthe Deputy Commissioner Of\Nincome Tax,\Ncorporate Circle 10,\Nchennai\N(Appellant)\Nvs. Arunchalam Veeraiah,\Nno.34, 14B, Beach Home Avenue,\Nbesant Nagar,\Nchennai 600 090.\N[Pan No.Aaipa 9044Q]\N(Respondent/Cross Objector)\N\Nassessee By\N: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate\Nrevenue By\N: Shri. P.K. Senthil Kumar, Addl. Cit.\N\Nसुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing\N: 30.01.2025\Nघोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 14.02.2025\N\Nआदेश / Order\N\Nmanu Kumar Giri ()\N\Nthe Appeal Of The Revenue & Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Arising\Nout Of The Order Dated 21.06.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals),\Nnfac, Delhi (In Short The `Ld. Cit(A)"). The Assessment Order U/S 144 R.W.S 147 Of\Nthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The 'Act'), Was Passed Vide Order Dated\N19.12.2019.\N\N2.\Nthe Registry Has Noted Delay Of 14 Days In Filing The Appeal By The Revenue.\Nconsidering Reasons Stated In The Affidavit By The Revenue, We Condone The Delay\Nand Admit The Appeal For Adjudication.\N\N3.\Ngrounds Of Appeal Filed By The Revenue Are As Under:\N\N\"1. The Order Of The Cit (A) Is Contrary To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case\Nand Provisions Of Income Tax Act 1961.\N2. The Id. Cit (A) Erred To Hold That The Notice U/S 148 Was Sent For The Service\Nafter 10 Months Delay & Holding The Assessment Order Dated 19.12.2019 As Time\Nbarred.\N2.

u/s 148 was not done in accordance with the prescribed procedure and was beyond the time limit for completing the reassessment. Therefore, the assessment order was invalid.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections": [ "147", "148", "153", "282", "292BB", "69A

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

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall— (a) issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish within

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

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall— (a) issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish within

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

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall— (a) issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish within

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

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall— (a) issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish within

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

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall— (a) issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish within