AGR Investment v. Additional Commissioner

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY, INCOME TAX OFFICE, TRICHY vs. LIFE LINE AUTO FINANCE, KARUR

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1630/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle-2, Trichy. Vs. Life Line Auto Finance, 306-B1, First Floor, Bharathi Nagar, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Karur - 639 002. [Pan:Aaefl-7071-N] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. R. Venkata Raman, C.A. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Shiva Srinivas, C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.01.2026 आदेश /Order Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: The Present Appeal Of The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21.03.2015 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”], Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 31.03.2022 Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Trichy (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ao”] U/S.143(3) R.W.S 153C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], For The Assessment Year 2013–14. :-2-:

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'बी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री जॉर्ज जॉर्ज के, उपाध्यक्ष एवं श्री एस.आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.:1630/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2013-14 ACIT, Central Circle-2, Trichy. vs. Life Line Auto Finance, 306-B1, First Floor, Bharathi Nagar, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Karur - 639 002. [PAN:AAEFL-7071-N] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant by : Shri. R. Venkata Raman, C.A. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CHITRAVEL VETRIMARAN, CHENNAI

…s also found therein and the incriminating material seized from Shri G.N. Anbuchezhian satisfies the meaning of books of account as per the provisions of section 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872, as the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chuharmal v. CIT (1988) 38 Taxmann 190 (SC) was pleased to held that whenever a need arises, the tax authorities can invoke the provisions of the Evidence Act. He vehemently argued that the material having been found from the premises of a third party and not having entries in the handwriting of the assessee could not be used to draw adverse inference in the case of the assessee is…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CHITRAVEL VETRIMARAN, CHENNAI

…s also found therein and the incriminating material seized from Shri G.N. Anbuchezhian satisfies the meaning of books of account as per the provisions of section 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872, as the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chuharmal v. CIT (1988) 38 Taxmann 190 (SC) was pleased to held that whenever a need arises, the tax authorities can invoke the provisions of the Evidence Act. He vehemently argued that the material having been found from the premises of a third party and not having entries in the handwriting of the assessee could not be used to draw adverse inference in the case of the assessee is…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. KASTHOORI RAJA DHANUSH, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and Cross-Objections

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3188 To 3192/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 & Cross-Objection Nos.22 To 26/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 The Acit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Department By Assessee By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement V. : : : : Kasthoori Raja Dhanush, Old No.16/5, New No.33/5, Rajamannar Street, Thyagaraya Nagar, Chennai-600 017. [Pan: Actpv 0618 E] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/Cross- Objector) Mrs. Sheila Parthasarthy, Cit Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate 28.04.2025 30.06.2025 आदेश / Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai (Hereinafter Referred To As `Ld.Cit(A) `) All Dated 17.10.2024 For The

…nd therein. In view of the above, the incriminating material seized from G. N. Anbuchezhian satisfies the meaning of "book of account" as per the provisions of Sec. 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of Chuharmal Vs CIT (1988) 38 Taxmann 190 (Supreme Court) has held that, whenever a need arises, the tax authorities can invoke the provisions of the Evidence Act. On the basis of the above, the decision relied on by the assessee in the case cited above is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of his case. (vi) The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Common Ca…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. KASTHOORI RAJA DHANUSH, CHENNAI

…rein. In\nview of the above, the incriminating material seized from G. N.\nAnbuchezhian satisfies the meaning of \"book of account\" as per the\nprovisions of Sec. 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The Hon'ble Supreme\nCourt in the Case of Chuharmal Vs CIT (1988) 38 Taxmann 190\n(Supreme Court) has held that, whenever a need arises, the tax\nauthorities can invoke the provisions of the Evidence Act. On the basis\nof the above, the decision relied on by the assessee in the case cited\nabove is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of his case.\n(vi) The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Comm…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. KASTHOORI RAJA DHANUSH, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and Cross

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…per the provisions of Sec. 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The Hon'ble Supreme provisions of Sec. 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The Hon'ble Supreme provisions of Sec. 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of Chuharmal Vs CIT (1988) 38 Taxmann 190 Court in the Case of Chuharmal Vs CIT (1988) 38 Taxmann 190 Court in the Case of Chuharmal Vs CIT (1988) 38 Taxmann 190 (Supreme Court) has held that, whenever a need arises, the tax (Supreme Court) has held that, whenever a need arises, the tax (Supreme Court) has held that, whenever a need arises, the tax authorities can invoke the pro autho…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. KASTHOORI RAJA DHANUSH, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and Cross

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…per the provisions of Sec. 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The Hon'ble Supreme provisions of Sec. 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The Hon'ble Supreme provisions of Sec. 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of Chuharmal Vs CIT (1988) 38 Taxmann 190 Court in the Case of Chuharmal Vs CIT (1988) 38 Taxmann 190 Court in the Case of Chuharmal Vs CIT (1988) 38 Taxmann 190 (Supreme Court) has held that, whenever a need arises, the tax (Supreme Court) has held that, whenever a need arises, the tax (Supreme Court) has held that, whenever a need arises, the tax authorities can invoke the pro autho…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. KASTHOORI RAJA DHANUSH, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and Cross

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…per the provisions of Sec. 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The Hon'ble Supreme provisions of Sec. 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The Hon'ble Supreme provisions of Sec. 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of Chuharmal Vs CIT (1988) 38 Taxmann 190 Court in the Case of Chuharmal Vs CIT (1988) 38 Taxmann 190 Court in the Case of Chuharmal Vs CIT (1988) 38 Taxmann 190 (Supreme Court) has held that, whenever a need arises, the tax (Supreme Court) has held that, whenever a need arises, the tax (Supreme Court) has held that, whenever a need arises, the tax authorities can invoke the pro autho…