CHUNGATH VARGHESE SUNNY,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

68,361 6.33% 41,77,350 2019-20 6,995.08 6,710.87 2,15,18,297 5.50% 11,82,873 2020-21 22,558.52 21,582.48 8,17,38,567 5.70% 46,58,920 2021-22 4,850.65 4,606.78 2,18,88,462 7.30% 15,98,937 12. Aggrieved of the above additions made by the AO, assessee carried

CHUNGATH VARGHESE SUNNY,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

68,361 6.33% 41,77,350 2019-20 6,995.08 6,710.87 2,15,18,297 5.50% 11,82,873 2020-21 22,558.52 21,582.48 8,17,38,567 5.70% 46,58,920 2021-22 4,850.65 4,606.78 2,18,88,462 7.30% 15,98,937 12. Aggrieved of the above additions made by the AO, assessee carried

CHUNGATH VARGHESE SUNNY,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

68,361 6.33% 41,77,350 2019-20 6,995.08 6,710.87 2,15,18,297 5.50% 11,82,873 2020-21 22,558.52 21,582.48 8,17,38,567 5.70% 46,58,920 2021-22 4,850.65 4,606.78 2,18,88,462 7.30% 15,98,937 12. Aggrieved of the above additions made by the AO, assessee carried

CHUNGATH VARGHESE SUNNY,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

68,361 6.33% 41,77,350 2019-20 6,995.08 6,710.87 2,15,18,297 5.50% 11,82,873 2020-21 22,558.52 21,582.48 8,17,38,567 5.70% 46,58,920 2021-22 4,850.65 4,606.78 2,18,88,462 7.30% 15,98,937 12. Aggrieved of the above additions made by the AO, assessee carried

CHUNGATH VARGHESE SUNNY,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

68,361 6.33% 41,77,350 2019-20 6,995.08 6,710.87 2,15,18,297 5.50% 11,82,873 2020-21 22,558.52 21,582.48 8,17,38,567 5.70% 46,58,920 2021-22 4,850.65 4,606.78 2,18,88,462 7.30% 15,98,937 12. Aggrieved of the above additions made by the AO, assessee carried

CHUNGATH VARGHESE SUNNY,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

68,361 6.33% 41,77,350 2019-20 6,995.08 6,710.87 2,15,18,297 5.50% 11,82,873 2020-21 22,558.52 21,582.48 8,17,38,567 5.70% 46,58,920 2021-22 4,850.65 4,606.78 2,18,88,462 7.30% 15,98,937 12. Aggrieved of the above additions made by the AO, assessee carried

CHUNGATH VARGHESE SUNNY,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

68,361 6.33% 41,77,350 2019-20 6,995.08 6,710.87 2,15,18,297 5.50% 11,82,873 2020-21 22,558.52 21,582.48 8,17,38,567 5.70% 46,58,920 2021-22 4,850.65 4,606.78 2,18,88,462 7.30% 15,98,937 12. Aggrieved of the above additions made by the AO, assessee carried

CHUNGATH VARGHESE SUNNY,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

68,361 6.33% 41,77,350 2019-20 6,995.08 6,710.87 2,15,18,297 5.50% 11,82,873 2020-21 22,558.52 21,582.48 8,17,38,567 5.70% 46,58,920 2021-22 4,850.65 4,606.78 2,18,88,462 7.30% 15,98,937 12. Aggrieved of the above additions made by the AO, assessee carried

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. JAGATHRAKSKAN SRINISHA, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1253, 1264 & 1271/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Central Circle -2(3), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Jagathrakshakan Srinisha, 1St Main Road, Adyar, Besant Nagar, Chennai - 600 020. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Abfps-1422-E] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca & Shri. Shrenik Chordia, Ca. राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri. C.N. Bipin, C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025 आदेश /Order Per S.R.Raghunatha, Am: The Present Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 06.02.2025 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19 (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld.Cit(A), Chennai, In Respect Of The Assessment Order Dated 01.03.2019 Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -2(3) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ao) For The Assessment Year 2017-18 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Impugned Assessment Year) U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act). :-2-:

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D to the extent such income has been included by the assessee in the return of income furnished under section 139 and the tax in accordance with the provisions of clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 115BBE has been

CHUNGATH VARGHESE SUNNY,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), CHENNAI

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1801 To 1805/Chny/2025 & 1806 To 1810/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2017-18 To 2021 -22 & 2017-18 To 2021-22 Chungath Varghese Sunny, 275-276, Cross Cut Road, Gandhipuram, Coimbatore – 641 012. [Pan:Ageps-1475-K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Dcit, Vs. Central Circle -3(3), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Ten Appeals Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Different Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai 20 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Id.Cit(A)”] Arising Out Of The Orders Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 3(3), Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ao”], U/S.153C R.W.S 143(3)/143(3)/270A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”] For The Assessment Years (“Ay/Ays”) 2017-18 To 2021-22. These Appeals Bearing Ita Nos.1801 To 1805/Chny/2025 Pertain To The Assessment Orders Passed U/S.153C R.W.S.143(3)/143(3) Of The Act, Whereas The Appeals Bearing Ita Nos.1806 To 1810/Chny/2025 Pertain To The Penalty Orders Passed U/S.270A Of The Act. 2. Since The Issues Involved In All The Five Assessment Years Under Consideration Are Identical In Nature & The Arguments Advanced By Both The Parties Are Common, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. We Shall First Address The Quantum Assessments.

68,361 | 6.93% | 47,42,350 | | 2019-20 | 6,995.08 | 6,710.87 | 2,15,18,297 | 6.50% | 11,82,873 | | 2020-21 | 22,558.52 | 21,582.48 | 8,17,38,567 | 5.70% | 46,58,920 | | 2021-22 | 4,850.65 | 4,606.78 | 2,18,88,462 | 7.30% | 15,98,937 | 12. Aggrieved of the above additions made by the AO, assessee carried

CHUNGATH VARGHESE SUNNY,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), CHENNAI

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1801 To 1805/Chny/2025 & 1806 To 1810/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2017-18 To 2021 -22 & 2017-18 To 2021-22 Chungath Varghese Sunny, 275-276, Cross Cut Road, Gandhipuram, Coimbatore – 641 012. [Pan:Ageps-1475-K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Dcit, Central Circle -3(3), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Ten Appeals Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Different Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai 20 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Id.Cit(A)”] Arising Out Of The Orders Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 3(3), Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ao”], U/S.153C R.W.S 143(3)/143(3)/270A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”] For The Assessment Years (“Ay/Ays”) 2017-18 To 2021-22. These Appeals Bearing Ita Nos.1801 To 1805/Chny/2025 Pertain To The Assessment Orders Passed U/S.153C R.W.S.143(3)/143(3) Of The Act, Whereas The Appeals Bearing Ita Nos.1806 To 1810/Chny/2025 Pertain To The Penalty Orders Passed U/S.270A Of The Act. 2. Since The Issues Involved In All The Five Assessment Years Under Consideration Are Identical In Nature & The Arguments Advanced By Both The Parties Are Common, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. We Shall First Address The Quantum Assessments.

68,361 | 6.93% | 45,73,350 | | 2019-20 | 6,995.08 | 6,710.87 | 2,15,18,297 | 5.50% | 11,82,873 | | 2020-21 | 22,558.52 | 21,582.48 | 8,17,38,567 | 5.70% | 46,58,920 | | 2021-22 | 4,850.65 | 4,606.78 | 2,18,88,462 | 7.30% | 15,98,937 | 12. Aggrieved of the above additions made by the AO, assessee carried

CHITRA RAMANATHAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD-17(6), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.374/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Chitra Ramanathan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 4/139,G2 Cozee Waves Apt., Non Corporate Ward 17(6), 7Th Street Swaminathan Nagar, Chennai. Kottivakkam, Chennai 600 041. [Pan:Aigpr5643A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N. Arjunraj, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22.11.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 01.03.2023 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2018-19 Passed Under Section 270A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

68,569/-, being 200% of tax payable. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the penalty levied under section 270A of the Act. 5. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that against the notice issued under section 270A of the Act, the assessee furnished

M/S THE PRESIDENCY CLUB,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.222/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 V. M/S. The Presidency Club, The Dcit, 51, Fairlawns, Ethiraj Salai, Corporate Circle-3(1), Egmore, Chennai. Chennai-600 008. [Pan: Aabct 1001 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

68. However, as per the SOP dated 09.08.2021, issued by the NaFAC Delhi, for penalties under Faceless Penalty Scheme-2021, the power to grant or reject immunity rests with the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. Since, this action is outside the purview of Faceless Penalty Scheme-2021, therefore, aforementioned application could not be entertained in this office and accordingly, was rejected. Further

OKASI CERAMICS,PERINTHALMANNA vs. ACIT, NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 779/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18

section 270A is introduced for rationalizing of provisions and levy of penalty is not mandatory. 2. It is submitted that the findings in the assessment order is as under " 3. Determination of Total Income: 3.1 In response to the notice issued u/s.142(1 ), Shri.Shaji Poulose, FCA appeared on behalf of the assessee and stated that, the firm has since

M/S. CITADINES OMR APARTHOTEL PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORP WARD 1(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the stay application of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.303/Chny/2026 & Sa No.29/Chny/2026 (Arising Out Of Ita No.303/Chny/2026) िनधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Citadines Omr Aparthotel Pvt. The Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Vs. Corporate Ward-1(3), No.94, Somerset Greenways, Chennai. Sathyadev Avenue, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. Pan: Aadcr 5653C

270A and initiation of proceedings under section 276C of section 276CC, if he fulfils the following conditions, namely:— (a) the tax and interest payable as per the order of assessment or reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or section 147, as the case may be, has been paid within the period specified

MUTHUSWAMY MURUGANANDHAM,TIRUVALLUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, TIRUVALLUR

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 397/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Muthuswamy Muruganandham, Income Tax Officer, 09-B, Variyar Nagar, Vs. Ward -1, Karthiekeyapuram Road, Tiruvallur. Tiruttani, Tiruvallur – 631 209. [Pan:Aropm-8711-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

8. Later the AO issued notice u/s.270A of the Act and despite having taken note of the assessee’s assertion that it had paid taxes and interest as per the assessment order u/s.143(3) of the Act dated 05.09.2022 which was very well within the period specified in the notice of demand and preferred no appeal against the assessment order

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

In the result, grounds of appeal raised

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

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU CIRCLE 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. PRUDENTIAL SUGAR CORPORATION LIMITED, CHITOOR

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2298/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Prudential Sugar Corporation Income Tax, Vs. Limited, Ltu, Circle -1, Prudential Nagar, Chennai. Koppedu Post, Nindra, Mandal – 517 587. [Pan:Aaacp-4338-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

68,898/- during F.Y. 2014-15. C. Operational expenses for F.Y. 2013-14 were Rs.21,022/- which increased to Rs.2,01,187/- during F.Y. 2014-15. Major operations expenses include Audit fees, Bank charges, share trading differences, ROC filing fees, DP charges, professional fees. D. Audit fees for F.Y. 2013-14 is Rs.1

NILGIRI DIST PALANTATION WORKERS COOP THIRFT AND CREDIT SOCIETY J 188, ,NILGIRI vs. ITO, WARD 1, OOTY, OOTY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1427/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 V. Nilgiri Dist. Plantation Workers Co- The Ito, Op. Thrift & Credit Society J188, Ward-1, Rokby, Coonoor, Ooty, The Nilgiris-643 102. Christo Building, Ii Floor, State Bank Road, Ootacamund-643 001. [Pan: Aaban 4395 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

8. And the AO thus framed the assessment order on 08.04.2021, by disallowing total deduction claimed u/s.80P(2) of the Act, amounting to Rs.1,23,93,154/- and assessed income at Rs.1,23,93,154/-. 9. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC who partly allowed the appeal by holding as under: 7.1. The appellant