BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

57 results for “section 68”+ Section 234A(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi611Mumbai398Bangalore253Jaipur112Hyderabad102Ahmedabad100Kolkata60Chennai57Pune40Nagpur36Indore32Allahabad31Karnataka31Ranchi30Chandigarh24Agra23Jodhpur23Visakhapatnam21Cochin17Lucknow17Amritsar15Rajkot13Guwahati13Surat12Dehradun12Raipur5SC4Varanasi2K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Telangana1Jabalpur1Cuttack1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 153A49Addition to Income47Section 234A44Section 143(3)38Section 13235Section 6834Section 13922Disallowance22Section 80I20Section 40A(3)

GNANASEKARAN,CUDDALORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1808/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1807 & 1808/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years :2015-16 & 2016-17 Shri Gnanasekaran, The Assistant Commissioner 21, Thirowpathi Amman Koil Street , Vs. Of Income Tax, Cuddalore-607 002. Central Circle -1(1) Pan: Acvpg-5138-J Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.M.Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 234A

3) of section 143 or section 144 or section 147, is furnished after the expiry of the time allowed under such notice, or is not furnished, the assessee shall be liable to pay simple interest at the rate of [one per cent for every month or part of a month comprised in the period commencing

Showing 1–20 of 57 · Page 1 of 3

20
Undisclosed Income16
Natural Justice14

GNANASEKARAN,CUDDALORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1807/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1807 & 1808/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years :2015-16 & 2016-17 Shri Gnanasekaran, The Assistant Commissioner 21, Thirowpathi Amman Koil Street , Vs. Of Income Tax, Cuddalore-607 002. Central Circle -1(1) Pan: Acvpg-5138-J Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.M.Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 234A

3) of section 143 or section 144 or section 147, is furnished after the expiry of the time allowed under such notice, or is not furnished, the assessee shall be liable to pay simple interest at the rate of [one per cent for every month or part of a month comprised in the period commencing

VARADAPPAN NATARAJAN,RASIPURAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1535/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T.S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 37Section 68

68 [constructed, one residential house in India) (hereafter in this section referred to as the new asset), the capital gain shall be dealt with in accordance with the following provisions of this section, that is to say,- (a) if the cost of the new asset is not less than the net consideration in respect of the original asset

SHRI V. NATARAJAN (INDIVIDUAL),RASIPURAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1801/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T.S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 37Section 68

68 [constructed, one residential house in India) (hereafter in this section referred to as the new asset), the capital gain shall be dealt with in accordance with the following provisions of this section, that is to say,- (a) if the cost of the new asset is not less than the net consideration in respect of the original asset

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

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

ITA 1015/CHNY/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act in the computation of taxable total income without assigning proper reasons and justification. 10. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that there was no proper opportunity given before passing the impugned order and any order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice is nullity in law. 11. The Appellant craves leave

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

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

ITA 1016/CHNY/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act in the computation of taxable total income without assigning proper reasons and justification. 10. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that there was no proper opportunity given before passing the impugned order and any order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice is nullity in law. 11. The Appellant craves leave

SHRI K.SRIKANTH,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 307/CHNY/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act in the computation of taxable total income without assigning proper reasons and justification. 10. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that there was no proper opportunity given before passing the impugned order and any order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice is nullity in law. 11. The Appellant craves leave

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

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

ITA 1324/CHNY/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act in the computation of taxable total income without assigning proper reasons and justification. 10. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that there was no proper opportunity given before passing the impugned order and any order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice is nullity in law. 11. The Appellant craves leave

PANDIAN HARI,CHENNAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER NON CORP WARD 11(40, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2598/CHNY/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2598/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Pandian Hari, The Income Tax Officer, 75/151 I Om Sri Sairam Plaza, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward 11(4), Thambuchetty Street, Chennai Parrys, Chennai – 600 001. Pan: Acfph 7870Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Dr.S. Sankar Ganesh, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07.01.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.01.2026

For Appellant: Dr.S. Sankar Ganesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2017-18. :- 2 -: 2. The prayer raised read as follows:- 1. Delete the addition of ₹40,44,000/- sustained u/s 68, 2. Delete the consequential tax u/s 115BBE and interest levied u/ss 234A, 234B, 234D, 3

ST. JOHN FREIGHT SYSTEMS LTD.,TUTICORIN vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, MADURAI

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 188/CHNY/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80I

68,84,120. This return claimed an deduction of Rs.1,31,84,425 u/s.80IA(4). But, since the original return was not filed in time, the claim of deduction claimed u/s.80IA(4) was denied because of the provisions of section 80AC. As per the provisions of Section 80AC, no deduction u/s.80IA shall be levied unless the assessee furnishes

ST. JOHN FREIGHT SYSTEMS LTD.,TUTICORIN vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, MADURAI

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 2899/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80I

68,84,120. This return claimed an deduction of Rs.1,31,84,425 u/s.80IA(4). But, since the original return was not filed in time, the claim of deduction claimed u/s.80IA(4) was denied because of the provisions of section 80AC. As per the provisions of Section 80AC, no deduction u/s.80IA shall be levied unless the assessee furnishes

ST. JOHN FREIGHT SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,,TUTUCORIN vs. DCIT, CC-1,, MADURAI

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 2900/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80I

68,84,120. This return claimed an deduction of Rs.1,31,84,425 u/s.80IA(4). But, since the original return was not filed in time, the claim of deduction claimed u/s.80IA(4) was denied because of the provisions of section 80AC. As per the provisions of Section 80AC, no deduction u/s.80IA shall be levied unless the assessee furnishes

ST. JOHN FREIGHT SYSTEMS LTD.,TUTICORIN vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, MADURAI

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 2898/CHNY/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80I

68,84,120. This return claimed an deduction of Rs.1,31,84,425 u/s.80IA(4). But, since the original return was not filed in time, the claim of deduction claimed u/s.80IA(4) was denied because of the provisions of section 80AC. As per the provisions of Section 80AC, no deduction u/s.80IA shall be levied unless the assessee furnishes

POPULAR FOUNDATIONS PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment years are allowed

ITA 67/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 66, 67, 68 & 69/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 M/S. Popular Foundations Pvt. Ltd., Assistant Commissioner Of No. 32/1, Kamatchi Apartments, V. Income Tax, 10Th Avenue, Ashok Nagar, Central Circle 3(4), Chennai – 83. Chennai. [Pan: Aabcp 6433G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. R. Sivaraman, Advocate : Shri. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.12.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.12.2021

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, Advocate
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 40A(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

234A, 2348 and 234C of the Act. On the strength of the abovementioned grounds and such other grounds that may be submitted before or at the time of hearing of the Appeal, the Hon'ble lTAT may be pleased to set aside the order of the CIT-(A) dated 25.10.2017 and thus render justice.” 3. The brief facts

POPULAR FOUNDATIONS PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment years are allowed

ITA 68/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 66, 67, 68 & 69/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 M/S. Popular Foundations Pvt. Ltd., Assistant Commissioner Of No. 32/1, Kamatchi Apartments, V. Income Tax, 10Th Avenue, Ashok Nagar, Central Circle 3(4), Chennai – 83. Chennai. [Pan: Aabcp 6433G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. R. Sivaraman, Advocate : Shri. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.12.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.12.2021

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, Advocate
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 40A(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

234A, 2348 and 234C of the Act. On the strength of the abovementioned grounds and such other grounds that may be submitted before or at the time of hearing of the Appeal, the Hon'ble lTAT may be pleased to set aside the order of the CIT-(A) dated 25.10.2017 and thus render justice.” 3. The brief facts

POPULAR FOUNDATIONS PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment years are allowed

ITA 69/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 66, 67, 68 & 69/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 M/S. Popular Foundations Pvt. Ltd., Assistant Commissioner Of No. 32/1, Kamatchi Apartments, V. Income Tax, 10Th Avenue, Ashok Nagar, Central Circle 3(4), Chennai – 83. Chennai. [Pan: Aabcp 6433G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. R. Sivaraman, Advocate : Shri. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.12.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.12.2021

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, Advocate
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 40A(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

234A, 2348 and 234C of the Act. On the strength of the abovementioned grounds and such other grounds that may be submitted before or at the time of hearing of the Appeal, the Hon'ble lTAT may be pleased to set aside the order of the CIT-(A) dated 25.10.2017 and thus render justice.” 3. The brief facts

POPULAR FOUNDATIONS PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment years are allowed

ITA 66/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 66, 67, 68 & 69/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 M/S. Popular Foundations Pvt. Ltd., Assistant Commissioner Of No. 32/1, Kamatchi Apartments, V. Income Tax, 10Th Avenue, Ashok Nagar, Central Circle 3(4), Chennai – 83. Chennai. [Pan: Aabcp 6433G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. R. Sivaraman, Advocate : Shri. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.12.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.12.2021

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, Advocate
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 40A(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

234A, 2348 and 234C of the Act. On the strength of the abovementioned grounds and such other grounds that may be submitted before or at the time of hearing of the Appeal, the Hon'ble lTAT may be pleased to set aside the order of the CIT-(A) dated 25.10.2017 and thus render justice.” 3. The brief facts

SHANMUGASUNDARAM VENKATACHALAPATHY,TIRUNELVELI, TAMILNADU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, TIRUNELVELI, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised

ITA 2056/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayshri Shanmugasundaram I.T.O., Venkatachalapathy, Vs. Ward-4, C/O-Durv & Associates Llp, No. Tirunelveli. 10/80, Avm Avenue 3Rd Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600092 (Tamil Nadu) Pan No. Acapv 3414 B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 250Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

68,909 has been deposited out of the retained earnings and cash balance available with the Appellant. 5. That the Learned CIT(A) has erred in upholding the order of the Learned AO without appreciating the fact that a sum of Rs. 16,95,000 has been deposited out of the contribution received from his spouse out of her income

TIRUCHANGODU RAMASAMY KHANNAIYANN SARASUWATHI,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, COIMBATORE

ITA 3135/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. T. Mythili, JCIT
Section 142A(6)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)

234A and 234C of the Income Tax Act. PRAYER For these grounds raised and such other grounds that may be raised, may be altered, amended or modified, with the leave of the Hon’ble Tribunal before or during the hearing of the appeal, it is most humbly prayed that the Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to: a) Delete

KARUNAMOORTHI KAVITHA,DHARMAPURI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1732/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1732/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Karunamoorthi Kavitha, Assistant Commissioner Of No.10A, Vijaya Hospital, V. Income Tax, Pennagaram Main Road, Opp Central Circle, Madheswara Theatre, Salem – 636 007. Dharmapuri – 636 701. [Pan: Amfpk-6223-L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate : Shri. Shiva Srinivas, Addl. Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.12.2024

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 234ASection 68

3) is bad in law. 4. For that Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) in confirming the Order of the Assessing Officer in treating source for investments made in the property as unexplained under Section 68 of the Act 5. For that the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that the Investment in property was made