Babuji Jacob v. ITO

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle-10, Chennai vs. Sj Suryah, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.806/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2002-03 V. Shri S.J.Suryah, The Asst. Commissioner- No.35-1D, Of Income Tax, 114, Neelakanta Mehta Street, Central Circle-2(4), T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Alyps 3012 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…ether the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of his income or concealed the particulars of his income. In order to buttress his arguments, he has cited the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of Babuji Jacob reported in 430 ITR 259 (Madras), wherein, in an identical case, penalty was levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act; and the assessee challenged, inter alia, the penalty imposed on the ground that the notice issued by AO u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act, in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proposed penalty was initiated for concealment of his particulars o…

Shri.S.J.Suryah, Chennai, Tamil Nadu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.806/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2002-03 V. Shri S.J.Suryah, The Asst. Commissioner- No.35-1D, Of Income Tax, 114, Neelakanta Mehta Street, Central Circle-2(4), T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Alyps 3012 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…ether the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of his income or concealed the particulars of his income. In order to buttress his arguments, he has cited the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of Babuji Jacob reported in 430 ITR 259 (Madras), wherein, in an identical case, penalty was levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act; and the assessee challenged, inter alia, the penalty imposed on the ground that the notice issued by AO u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act, in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proposed penalty was initiated for concealment of his particulars o…

Amit Kapoor, Chennai vs. CIT, Exemptions, Chennai

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1415/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Shri Samiappagounder Dharmaraj, The Addl.Cit, 56/88, Rayapuram Extension, Range-1, 1St Street, Tirupur. Tirupur-641 601. [Pan: Adypd 3863 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…) Tax Appeal No. 18 of 2019 dated November 26, 2019 and the hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Dilip N. Shroff v. Jaint CIT [2007] 291 ITR 519 (SC) on the issue of non-application of mind. Shri Samiappagounder Dharmaraj :: 11 :: vi) Babbuji Jacob v. ITO [2021] 430 ITR 259 (Mad) vii) CIT D. Anita Kumaran (Smt.) [2018] 11 ITR-OL 221 (Mad) (para 36) viii) CIT v. Atul Mohan Bindal [2009] 317 ITR 1 (SC) (para 36) ix) CIT D. Gem Granites (Karnataka) [2014] 42 taxmann.com 493 (para 29) x) CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory [2013] 359 ITR 565 (Karn) (para 14) xi) CIT v. Original Kerala Jewellers (T. C. A. No. 71…

Samiappagounder Dharmaraj, Tirupur vs. Addl. CIT, Range-1, Tirupur

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1415/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Shri Samiappagounder Dharmaraj, The Addl.Cit, 56/88, Rayapuram Extension, Range-1, 1St Street, Tirupur. Tirupur-641 601. [Pan: Adypd 3863 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…) Tax Appeal No. 18 of 2019 dated November 26, 2019 and the hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Dilip N. Shroff v. Jaint CIT [2007] 291 ITR 519 (SC) on the issue of non-application of mind. Shri Samiappagounder Dharmaraj :: 11 :: vi) Babbuji Jacob v. ITO [2021] 430 ITR 259 (Mad) vii) CIT D. Anita Kumaran (Smt.) [2018] 11 ITR-OL 221 (Mad) (para 36) viii) CIT v. Atul Mohan Bindal [2009] 317 ITR 1 (SC) (para 36) ix) CIT D. Gem Granites (Karnataka) [2014] 42 taxmann.com 493 (para 29) x) CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory [2013] 359 ITR 565 (Karn) (para 14) xi) CIT v. Original Kerala Jewellers (T. C. A. No. 71…

M/S Enria Enterprises Pvt. Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT. Central Circle - 3(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

…Act is quashed and Respondent No.1 is directed to grant immunity under Section 270AA of the Act to the Petitioner. 18. At this stage, it is relevant to consider the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Babuji Jacob v. ITO reported in [2021] 430 ITR 259 (Madras), where the Hon’ble High Court has dealt with the issue of show cause notice u/s.274 r.w.s.271(1)(c) of the Act, and after considering its earlier decision in the case of Sudaram Finance Ltd. v. ACIT reported in [2018] 93 taxmann.com 250, held that issuing a printed form of notice without striking inapplicable portion in the notice and…

M/S Enrice Enterprises Pvt. Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

…Act is quashed and Respondent No.1 is directed to grant immunity under Section 270AA of the Act to the Petitioner. 18. At this stage, it is relevant to consider the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Babuji Jacob v. ITO reported in [2021] 430 ITR 259 (Madras), where the Hon’ble High Court has dealt with the issue of show cause notice u/s.274 r.w.s.271(1)(c) of the Act, and after considering its earlier decision in the case of Sudaram Finance Ltd. v. ACIT reported in [2018] 93 taxmann.com 250, held that issuing a printed form of notice without striking inapplicable portion in the notice and…

M/S.Enrica Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

…it is relevant to consider various case laws relied upon by the Ld.Counsel for the assessee. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Madras in the case of Babuji Jacob v. ITO reported in [2021] 430 ITR 259 (Madras). The Hon’ble Madras High Court after considering its earlier decision in the case of Sudaram Finance Ltd. v. ACIT reported in [2018] 93 taxmann.com 250, has held that penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act, consequent to vague/defect notice issued u/s.274 r.w.s.271(1)(c) of the Act, cannot be sustained under the law. The relevant fin…

M/S Enrica Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

…it is relevant to consider various case laws relied upon by the Ld.Counsel for the assessee. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Madras in the case of Babuji Jacob v. ITO reported in [2021] 430 ITR 259 (Madras). The Hon’ble Madras High Court after considering its earlier decision in the case of Sudaram Finance Ltd. v. ACIT reported in [2018] 93 taxmann.com 250, has held that penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act, consequent to vague/defect notice issued u/s.274 r.w.s.271(1)(c) of the Act, cannot be sustained under the law. The relevant fin…

Sree Navaladian Finance, Namakkal vs. ITO, Salem

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…non-striking of the limbs in the penalty notice would not invalidate the notice, where both limbs are attracted. The CIT(A) also distinguished the case law relied on by the assessee of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Babuji Jacob vs. ITO reported in 430 ITR 259 and finally, the CIT(A) held as under: ITA Nos.1154 to 1157/Chny/2023 7.4.4 Hon 'ble courts have held in following cases that where both limbs are attracted, non-striking of one of the limbs in the penalty notice would not invalidate penalty and that minor defect in the notice issued cannot be the basis of deletion of penalty levied or declaring…

Sree Navaladiyan Finance, Salem vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Salem

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…non-striking of the limbs in the penalty notice would not invalidate the notice, where both limbs are attracted. The CIT(A) also distinguished the case law relied on by the assessee of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Babuji Jacob vs. ITO reported in 430 ITR 259 and finally, the CIT(A) held as under: ITA Nos.1154 to 1157/Chny/2023 7.4.4 Hon 'ble courts have held in following cases that where both limbs are attracted, non-striking of one of the limbs in the penalty notice would not invalidate penalty and that minor defect in the notice issued cannot be the basis of deletion of penalty levied or declaring…

Sreenavaladian Finance, Salem vs. DCIT, Centralcircle, Salem

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…non-striking of the limbs in the penalty notice would not invalidate the notice, where both limbs are attracted. The CIT(A) also distinguished the case law relied on by the assessee of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Babuji Jacob vs. ITO reported in 430 ITR 259 and finally, the CIT(A) held as under: ITA Nos.1154 to 1157/Chny/2023 7.4.4 Hon 'ble courts have held in following cases that where both limbs are attracted, non-striking of one of the limbs in the penalty notice would not invalidate penalty and that minor defect in the notice issued cannot be the basis of deletion of penalty levied or declaring…

Sree Navaladiyan Finance, Namakkal vs. DCIT, Cent Circle, Salem

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…non-striking of the limbs in the penalty notice would not invalidate the notice, where both limbs are attracted. The CIT(A) also distinguished the case law relied on by the assessee of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Babuji Jacob vs. ITO reported in 430 ITR 259 and finally, the CIT(A) held as under: ITA Nos.1154 to 1157/Chny/2023 7.4.4 Hon 'ble courts have held in following cases that where both limbs are attracted, non-striking of one of the limbs in the penalty notice would not invalidate penalty and that minor defect in the notice issued cannot be the basis of deletion of penalty levied or declaring…

M.Arun, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-2(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.573/Chny/2021 िनधा)रण वष) /Assessment Year: 2008-09

…d 23-04-2018) as well as the decision of this Tribunal in M/s TVS Supply Chain Solutions vs. ACIT (ITA No.585/Chny/2019 dated 31- 08-2021). The Ld. AR controverted the same and relied on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Babuji Jacob vs. ITO (124 Taxmann.com 363) which has already distinguished the decision in Sundaram Finance Ltd. (supra). The Ld. AR submitted that the satisfaction of Ld. AO about each of the limb should be discernible for the show-cause notice as well as from penalty order. In the absence of such clear satisfaction, the penalty proceedings would be bad in law. 5. Having heard…

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

…notice, it is no more issue before us for consideration and therefore, the case law relied on by the ld. Counsel for the assessee has no application. 30. The other case law brought on record in the form of paper book-2 in the case of (2) Babuji Jacob vs. ITO 430 ITR 259, (3) Mohd Farhan A sheikh vs. DCIT 434 ITR (Bom) and (4) CIT vs. SSA Emerald Meadows 73 txmann.com 241 (Karnataka) have no application to the facts of the present case. 31. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee in I.T.A. No. 2691/Chny/2018 in the case of Shri D. Srinivas Vyas is dismissed. Since, similar are the facts in I.T.A.…

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

…notice, it is no more issue before us for consideration and therefore, the case law relied on by the ld. Counsel for the assessee has no application. 30. The other case law brought on record in the form of paper book-2 in the case of (2) Babuji Jacob vs. ITO 430 ITR 259, (3) Mohd Farhan A sheikh vs. DCIT 434 ITR (Bom) and (4) CIT vs. SSA Emerald Meadows 73 txmann.com 241 (Karnataka) have no application to the facts of the present case. 31. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee in I.T.A. No. 2691/Chny/2018 in the case of Shri D. Srinivas Vyas is dismissed. Since, similar are the facts in I.T.A.…

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

…notice, it is no more issue before us for consideration and therefore, the case law relied on by the ld. Counsel for the assessee has no application. 30. The other case law brought on record in the form of paper book-2 in the case of (2) Babuji Jacob vs. ITO 430 ITR 259, (3) Mohd Farhan A sheikh vs. DCIT 434 ITR (Bom) and (4) CIT vs. SSA Emerald Meadows 73 txmann.com 241 (Karnataka) have no application to the facts of the present case. 31. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee in I.T.A. No. 2691/Chny/2018 in the case of Shri D. Srinivas Vyas is dismissed. Since, similar are the facts in I.T.A.…

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

…notice, it is no more issue before us for consideration and therefore, the case law relied on by the ld. Counsel for the assessee has no application. 30. The other case law brought on record in the form of paper book-2 in the case of (2) Babuji Jacob vs. ITO 430 ITR 259, (3) Mohd Farhan A sheikh vs. DCIT 434 ITR (Bom) and (4) CIT vs. SSA Emerald Meadows 73 txmann.com 241 (Karnataka) have no application to the facts of the present case. 31. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee in I.T.A. No. 2691/Chny/2018 in the case of Shri D. Srinivas Vyas is dismissed. Since, similar are the facts in I.T.A.…

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

…notice, it is no more issue before us for consideration and therefore, the case law relied on by the ld. Counsel for the assessee has no application. 30. The other case law brought on record in the form of paper book-2 in the case of (2) Babuji Jacob vs. ITO 430 ITR 259, (3) Mohd Farhan A sheikh vs. DCIT 434 ITR (Bom) and (4) CIT vs. SSA Emerald Meadows 73 txmann.com 241 (Karnataka) have no application to the facts of the present case. 31. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee in I.T.A. No. 2691/Chny/2018 in the case of Shri D. Srinivas Vyas is dismissed. Since, similar are the facts in I.T.A.…

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

…notice, it is no more issue before us for consideration and therefore, the case law relied on by the ld. Counsel for the assessee has no application. 30. The other case law brought on record in the form of paper book-2 in the case of (2) Babuji Jacob vs. ITO 430 ITR 259, (3) Mohd Farhan A sheikh vs. DCIT 434 ITR (Bom) and (4) CIT vs. SSA Emerald Meadows 73 txmann.com 241 (Karnataka) have no application to the facts of the present case. 31. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee in I.T.A. No. 2691/Chny/2018 in the case of Shri D. Srinivas Vyas is dismissed. Since, similar are the facts in I.T.A.…

D.Srinivas Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

…notice, it is no more issue before us for consideration and therefore, the case law relied on by the ld. Counsel for the assessee has no application. 30. The other case law brought on record in the form of paper book-2 in the case of (2) Babuji Jacob vs. ITO 430 ITR 259, (3) Mohd Farhan A sheikh vs. DCIT 434 ITR (Bom) and (4) CIT vs. SSA Emerald Meadows 73 txmann.com 241 (Karnataka) have no application to the facts of the present case. 31. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee in I.T.A. No. 2691/Chny/2018 in the case of Shri D. Srinivas Vyas is dismissed. Since, similar are the facts in I.T.A.…