M/s SRS Mining v. UOI

DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chenai vs. C.Vijaya Baskar, Pudukottai

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” ायपीठ चेई म। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय ी मनोज कु मार अवाल ,लेखा सद# एवं माननीय ी मनु कु मार िग&र, ाियक सद# के सम'। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM 1. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.695/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.696/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.697/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.698/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.699/…

DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chenai vs. C.Vijaya Baskar, Pudukottai

In the result, ITA Nos.695 to 702/Chny/2023 stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.695/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.696/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.697/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.698/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.699/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.700/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.701/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 8. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.702/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dcit Shri C. Vijayabaskar बनाम/ Central Circle-2(1) #14/28-1, Sowrastra Street, Chennai. Illupur, Pudukottai-622 102. Vs.

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद# एवं माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग&र, "ाियक सद# के सम'। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM 1. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.695/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.696/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.697/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.698/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.699/Chny/…

DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chenai vs. C.Vijaya Baskar, Pudukottai

In the result, ITA Nos.695 to 702/Chny/2023 stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.695/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.696/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.697/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.698/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.699/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.700/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.701/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 8. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.702/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dcit Shri C. Vijayabaskar बनाम/ Central Circle-2(1) #14/28-1, Sowrastra Street, Chennai. Illupur, Pudukottai-622 102. Vs.

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद# एवं माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग&र, "ाियक सद# के सम'। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM 1. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.695/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.696/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.697/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.698/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.699/Chny/…

DCIT, Central Circle2(4), Chennai vs. S. Elambharathi, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cos

…statement of Shri K. Srinivasulu, as held by Hon'ble Court, is to be ignored since that witness turned hostile and in such a case, there was even no requirement to allow his cross-examination. Similarly, the Hon'ble Court in the case of M/s SRS Mining Vs UOI (141 Taxmann.com 272), at para 9, similarly observed that the statement of Shri K Srinivasulu could not be relied upon as he turned hostile by giving specific retraction statement and there was no need to accord permission to cross-examine him in view of the said reason. Considering these observations, it was to be held that the statement of Shri K. Srinivasu…

DCIT, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai vs. Shri S. Elembharathi, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cos filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.220 & 221/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 & C.O. Nos. 7 & 8/Chny/2022 [In Ita Nos. 220 & 221/Chny/2022] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shri S. Elambharathi, Income Tax, Central Circle -2 (4), Flat No. 5, Ground Floor, 364, Room No. B6, Investigation Building, Kurupam Court, Lloyds Road, No. 46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai 600 086. Chennai 34. [Pan: Aacpe3945N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit Assessee By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri P.M. Kathir, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: Both The Appeals & The Cross Objections Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Respectively Are Directed Against The Common Order Dated 28.01.2022 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2017-18. 2. Since The Issue Raised In The Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

…statement of Shri K. Srinivasulu, as held by Hon’ble Court, is to be ignored since that witness turned hostile and in such a case, there was even no requirement to allow his cross-examination. Similarly, the Hon’ble Court in the case of M/s SRS Mining Vs UOI (141 Taxmann.com 272), at para 9, similarly observed that the statement of Shri K Srinivasulu could not be relied upon as he turned hostile by giving specific retraction statement and there was no need to accord permission to cross-examine him in view of the said reason. Considering these observations, it was to be held that the statement of Shri K. Srinivasu…

DCIT Central Circle2(4), Chennai vs. Shri O. Panneerselvam, Chennai

In the result, the cross-objections stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jmand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.581/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.582/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri O. Panneerselvam बनाम Central Circle-2(4), No.70, South Agraharam, / Vs. Chennai. Tenkarai, Periakulam-625 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Amapp-6689-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 3. Cross Objection No.5/Chny/2024 (In Ita No.581/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. Cross Objection No.6/Chny/2024 (In Ita No.582/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri O. Panneerselvam Dcit बनाम No.70, South Agraharam, Central Circle-2(4), / Vs. Tenkarai, Periakulam-625 601. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Amapp-6689-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant/Cross Objector) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Revenue By : Shri V. Nanda Kumar (Cit) - Ld. Dr !"थ"कीओरसे/Assessee By : Shri G. Baskar (Advocate)- Ld.Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-01-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05-04-2024

…le Court further observed that if AO was to rely on the statement of Shri K. Srinivasulu which is in favor of the revenue, the AO has to let in other reliable evidence to corroborate the same. Similarly, the Hon’ble Court in the case of M/s SRS mining Vs UOI (141 Taxmann.com 272), at para 9, observed that the statement of Shri K Srinivasulu could not be relied upon as he turned hostile by giving specific retraction statement and there was no need to accord permission to cross-examine him in view of the said reason. Considering these observations, it was to be held that the statement of Shri K. Srinivasulu could n…

DCIT Central Circle2(4), Chennai vs. Shri O. Panneerselvam, Chennai

In the result, the cross-objections stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jmand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.581/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.582/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri O. Panneerselvam बनाम Central Circle-2(4), No.70, South Agraharam, / Vs. Chennai. Tenkarai, Periakulam-625 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Amapp-6689-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 3. Cross Objection No.5/Chny/2024 (In Ita No.581/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. Cross Objection No.6/Chny/2024 (In Ita No.582/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri O. Panneerselvam Dcit बनाम No.70, South Agraharam, Central Circle-2(4), / Vs. Tenkarai, Periakulam-625 601. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Amapp-6689-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant/Cross Objector) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Revenue By : Shri V. Nanda Kumar (Cit) - Ld. Dr !"थ"कीओरसे/Assessee By : Shri G. Baskar (Advocate)- Ld.Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-01-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05-04-2024

…le Court further observed that if AO was to rely on the statement of Shri K. Srinivasulu which is in favor of the revenue, the AO has to let in other reliable evidence to corroborate the same. Similarly, the Hon’ble Court in the case of M/s SRS mining Vs UOI (141 Taxmann.com 272), at para 9, observed that the statement of Shri K Srinivasulu could not be relied upon as he turned hostile by giving specific retraction statement and there was no need to accord permission to cross-examine him in view of the said reason. Considering these observations, it was to be held that the statement of Shri K. Srinivasulu could n…

DCIT Central Circle 2(4), Chennai vs. Shri Vaithilingam, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross-objections of the assessee, for all the three years, stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.604/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.605/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.606/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri Vaithilingam बनाम Central Circle-2(4) No.3/335, South Street, Chennai. Telungankudikadu, Orathanad, / Vs. Thanjavur-614 625. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aeapv-5323-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. Cross Objection No.51/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.604/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. Cross Objection No.52/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.605/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. Cross Objection No.53/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.606/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

…ne basis, would have no evidentiary value. The Hon’ble Curt held that if Ld. AO was to rely on this statement, he was to let in other reliable evidence to corroborate the same. Similar were the directions of Hon’ble Court in the case of M/s SRS mining Vs UOI (141 Taxmann.com 272). Therefore, the statement of Shri K. Srinivasulu could not be used against the assessee unless some other evidence to corroborate the same was made available on record. In the present case, AO relied on reply of Shri K. Srinivasulu to Q.No.12 wherein he stated that page Nos.34 to 58 of the seized loose sheets vide ANN/KGAR/MPKSSR/LS/S-1…

DCIT Central Circle 2(4), Chennai vs. Shri Vaithilingam, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross-objections of the assessee, for all the three years, stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.604/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.605/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.606/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri Vaithilingam बनाम Central Circle-2(4) No.3/335, South Street, Chennai. Telungankudikadu, Orathanad, / Vs. Thanjavur-614 625. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aeapv-5323-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. Cross Objection No.51/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.604/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. Cross Objection No.52/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.605/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. Cross Objection No.53/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.606/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

…ne basis, would have no evidentiary value. The Hon’ble Curt held that if Ld. AO was to rely on this statement, he was to let in other reliable evidence to corroborate the same. Similar were the directions of Hon’ble Court in the case of M/s SRS mining Vs UOI (141 Taxmann.com 272). Therefore, the statement of Shri K. Srinivasulu could not be used against the assessee unless some other evidence to corroborate the same was made available on record. In the present case, AO relied on reply of Shri K. Srinivasulu to Q.No.12 wherein he stated that page Nos.34 to 58 of the seized loose sheets vide ANN/KGAR/MPKSSR/LS/S-1…

DCIT Central Circle 2(4), Chennai vs. Shri Vaithilingam, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross-objections of the assessee, for all the three years, stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.604/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.605/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.606/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri Vaithilingam बनाम Central Circle-2(4) No.3/335, South Street, Chennai. Telungankudikadu, Orathanad, / Vs. Thanjavur-614 625. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aeapv-5323-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. Cross Objection No.51/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.604/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. Cross Objection No.52/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.605/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. Cross Objection No.53/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.606/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

…ne basis, would have no evidentiary value. The Hon’ble Curt held that if Ld. AO was to rely on this statement, he was to let in other reliable evidence to corroborate the same. Similar were the directions of Hon’ble Court in the case of M/s SRS mining Vs UOI (141 Taxmann.com 272). Therefore, the statement of Shri K. Srinivasulu could not be used against the assessee unless some other evidence to corroborate the same was made available on record. In the present case, AO relied on reply of Shri K. Srinivasulu to Q.No.12 wherein he stated that page Nos.34 to 58 of the seized loose sheets vide ANN/KGAR/MPKSSR/LS/S-1…

Shri K. Palaniswami, Salem vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.125/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.126/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.127/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri Karuppagounder Palaniswami बनाम 171/1B, Rajapuram 1St Street, Central Circle-2(2) / Vs. Chennai. Nedunchalai Nagar, Salem-636 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ayxpp-6611-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.213/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.214/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.215/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) बनाम/ Shri Karuppagounder Palaniswami Dcit 171/1B, Rajapuram 1St Street, Vs. Central Circle-2(2) Nedunchalai Nagar, Salem-636 004. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ayxpp-6611-P ((अपीलाथ"/Appellant)) : (!"थ" / Respondent)

…tatement of Shri K. Srinivasulu, as held by Hon’ble Court, is to be ignored since that witness turned hostile and in such a case, there was even no requirement to allow his cross- examination. Similarly, the Hon’ble Court in the case of M/s SRS Mining Vs UOI (141 Taxmann.com 272), at para 9, similarly observed that the statement of Shri K Srinivasulu could not be relied upon as he turned hostile by giving specific retraction statement and there was no need to accord permission to cross-examine him in view of the said reason. Considering these observations, it was to be held that the statement of Shri K. Srinivasu…

Shri K. Palaniswami, Salem vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.125/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.126/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.127/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri Karuppagounder Palaniswami बनाम 171/1B, Rajapuram 1St Street, Central Circle-2(2) / Vs. Chennai. Nedunchalai Nagar, Salem-636 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ayxpp-6611-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.213/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.214/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.215/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) बनाम/ Shri Karuppagounder Palaniswami Dcit 171/1B, Rajapuram 1St Street, Vs. Central Circle-2(2) Nedunchalai Nagar, Salem-636 004. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ayxpp-6611-P ((अपीलाथ"/Appellant)) : (!"थ" / Respondent)

…tatement of Shri K. Srinivasulu, as held by Hon’ble Court, is to be ignored since that witness turned hostile and in such a case, there was even no requirement to allow his cross- examination. Similarly, the Hon’ble Court in the case of M/s SRS Mining Vs UOI (141 Taxmann.com 272), at para 9, similarly observed that the statement of Shri K Srinivasulu could not be relied upon as he turned hostile by giving specific retraction statement and there was no need to accord permission to cross-examine him in view of the said reason. Considering these observations, it was to be held that the statement of Shri K. Srinivasu…

Shri K. Palaniswami, Salem vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.125/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.126/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.127/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri Karuppagounder Palaniswami बनाम 171/1B, Rajapuram 1St Street, Central Circle-2(2) / Vs. Chennai. Nedunchalai Nagar, Salem-636 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ayxpp-6611-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.213/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.214/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.215/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) बनाम/ Shri Karuppagounder Palaniswami Dcit 171/1B, Rajapuram 1St Street, Vs. Central Circle-2(2) Nedunchalai Nagar, Salem-636 004. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ayxpp-6611-P ((अपीलाथ"/Appellant)) : (!"थ" / Respondent)

…tatement of Shri K. Srinivasulu, as held by Hon’ble Court, is to be ignored since that witness turned hostile and in such a case, there was even no requirement to allow his cross- examination. Similarly, the Hon’ble Court in the case of M/s SRS Mining Vs UOI (141 Taxmann.com 272), at para 9, similarly observed that the statement of Shri K Srinivasulu could not be relied upon as he turned hostile by giving specific retraction statement and there was no need to accord permission to cross-examine him in view of the said reason. Considering these observations, it was to be held that the statement of Shri K. Srinivasu…

DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai vs. Shri K. Palaniswami, Salem

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.125/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.126/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.127/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri Karuppagounder Palaniswami बनाम 171/1B, Rajapuram 1St Street, Central Circle-2(2) / Vs. Chennai. Nedunchalai Nagar, Salem-636 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ayxpp-6611-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.213/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.214/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.215/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) बनाम/ Shri Karuppagounder Palaniswami Dcit 171/1B, Rajapuram 1St Street, Vs. Central Circle-2(2) Nedunchalai Nagar, Salem-636 004. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ayxpp-6611-P ((अपीलाथ"/Appellant)) : (!"थ" / Respondent)

…tatement of Shri K. Srinivasulu, as held by Hon’ble Court, is to be ignored since that witness turned hostile and in such a case, there was even no requirement to allow his cross- examination. Similarly, the Hon’ble Court in the case of M/s SRS Mining Vs UOI (141 Taxmann.com 272), at para 9, similarly observed that the statement of Shri K Srinivasulu could not be relied upon as he turned hostile by giving specific retraction statement and there was no need to accord permission to cross-examine him in view of the said reason. Considering these observations, it was to be held that the statement of Shri K. Srinivasu…

DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai vs. Shri K. Palaniswami, Salem

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.125/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.126/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.127/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri Karuppagounder Palaniswami बनाम 171/1B, Rajapuram 1St Street, Central Circle-2(2) / Vs. Chennai. Nedunchalai Nagar, Salem-636 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ayxpp-6611-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.213/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.214/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.215/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) बनाम/ Shri Karuppagounder Palaniswami Dcit 171/1B, Rajapuram 1St Street, Vs. Central Circle-2(2) Nedunchalai Nagar, Salem-636 004. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ayxpp-6611-P ((अपीलाथ"/Appellant)) : (!"थ" / Respondent)

…tatement of Shri K. Srinivasulu, as held by Hon’ble Court, is to be ignored since that witness turned hostile and in such a case, there was even no requirement to allow his cross- examination. Similarly, the Hon’ble Court in the case of M/s SRS Mining Vs UOI (141 Taxmann.com 272), at para 9, similarly observed that the statement of Shri K Srinivasulu could not be relied upon as he turned hostile by giving specific retraction statement and there was no need to accord permission to cross-examine him in view of the said reason. Considering these observations, it was to be held that the statement of Shri K. Srinivasu…

DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai vs. Shri K. Palaniswami, Salem

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.125/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.126/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.127/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri Karuppagounder Palaniswami बनाम 171/1B, Rajapuram 1St Street, Central Circle-2(2) / Vs. Chennai. Nedunchalai Nagar, Salem-636 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ayxpp-6611-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.213/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.214/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.215/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) बनाम/ Shri Karuppagounder Palaniswami Dcit 171/1B, Rajapuram 1St Street, Vs. Central Circle-2(2) Nedunchalai Nagar, Salem-636 004. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ayxpp-6611-P ((अपीलाथ"/Appellant)) : (!"थ" / Respondent)

…tatement of Shri K. Srinivasulu, as held by Hon’ble Court, is to be ignored since that witness turned hostile and in such a case, there was even no requirement to allow his cross- examination. Similarly, the Hon’ble Court in the case of M/s SRS Mining Vs UOI (141 Taxmann.com 272), at para 9, similarly observed that the statement of Shri K Srinivasulu could not be relied upon as he turned hostile by giving specific retraction statement and there was no need to accord permission to cross-examine him in view of the said reason. Considering these observations, it was to be held that the statement of Shri K. Srinivasu…